5 hours ago, Rimsen said:

Please quote me back, where exactly I judged the others. I am curious.

You got offended at my remark of some calling it “participation trophies”, that’s a judgment on others I was criticizing. If you don’t call it that then why exactly did you assume I was judging you when I had never quoted nor responded to you to begin with?

23 minutes ago, TwitchyBait said:

You got offended at my remark of some calling it “participation trophies”, that’s a judgment on others I was criticizing. If you don’t call it that then why exactly did you assume I was judging you when I had never quoted nor responded to you to begin with?

You literally quoted and responded to Rimsen’s post, saying:

9 hours ago, TwitchyBait said:

Pot meet kettle, judging others calling it participation trophies while not wanting to be judged, sure ok then

Not quite sure how that’s to be taken as “never quoting nor responding to (Rimsen) to begin with.”

20 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

You literally quoted and responded to Rimsen’s post, saying:

Not quite sure how that’s to be taken as “never quoting nor responding to (Rimsen) to begin with.”

Again reading comprehension, try it sometime. “To begin with”

No **** I responded to them AFTER they quoted me and took offense at my BEGINNING post.

2 minutes ago, TwitchyBait said:

Again reading comprehension, try it sometime. “To begin with”

No **** I responded to them AFTER they quoted me and took offense at my BEGINNING post.

Rimsen had stated that, at their table, XP is not received by players who aren’t present. You proceeded to excoriate such settings. “Awful tables,” you called them, suggesting that such scenarios treat XP as “participation trophies.”

For someone who keeps admonishing others about poor reading comprehension, you sure do seem bothered by people who do comprehend what you’re saying, but don’t agree.

11 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Rimsen had stated that, at their table, XP is not received by players who aren’t present. You proceeded to excoriate such settings. “Awful tables,” you called them, suggesting that such scenarios treat XP as “participation trophies.”

For someone who keeps admonishing others about poor reading comprehension, you sure do seem bothered by people who do comprehend what you’re saying, but don’t agree.

Again you either fail to read or you’re simply a liar which is it? I opened that first statement pointing out some people calling the act of giving out xp to absent players as “participation awards” then proceeded to say I believed THOSE tables where awful. Please lie some more because you don’t agree with me, harms me not at all.

16 hours ago, TwitchyBait said:

imposing that ruling

Unless I missed something (which is totally possible), the rules don't say anything about giving XP to absentee players; so regardless of its merits (which I don't argue), those who do so would actually be the ones 'imposing a ruling'.

Something that the rules do talk about is giving extra XP for those who play well to their character's motivation. I'm genuinely curious to know how those in the absentee XP camp feel about that.

1 hour ago, TwitchyBait said:

Again you either fail to read or you’re simply a liar which is it? I opened that first statement pointing out some people calling the act of giving out xp to absent players as “participation awards” then proceeded to say I believed THOSE tables where awful. Please lie some more because you don’t agree with me, harms me not at all.

To lie some more, I would have to lie a first time.

And, I read and understand your posts quite well, thanks.

You, on the other hand, are the one going on and on about how absent players not receiving XP is a “punishment.”

Well...never mind.

You win. I surrender. You’ve caught us. GMs who don’t award XP to absent players? We do it because we’re eeeevil. We’re aspiring Palpatines. Why, I’ve been known to sneak out and slash my players’ tires so they can’t make it, and I can laugh maniacally as I say, “No XP for them!” Flogging them is illegal, but the pain of not receiving XP is even more delicious.

23 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

To lie some more, I would have to lie a first time.

And, I read and understand your posts quite well, thanks.

You, on the other hand, are the one going on and on about how absent players not receiving XP is a “punishment.”

Well...never mind.

You win. I surrender. You’ve caught us. GMs who don’t award XP to absent players? We do it because we’re eeeevil. We’re aspiring Palpatines. Why, I’ve been known to sneak out and slash my players’ tires so they can’t make it, and I can laugh maniacally as I say, “No XP for them!” Flogging them is illegal, but the pain of not receiving XP is even more delicious.

Oh look another straw man, honest discussion that difficult aye?

37 minutes ago, Vorzakk said:

Unless I missed something (which is totally possible), the rules don't say anything about giving XP to absentee players; so regardless of its merits (which I don't argue), those who do so would actually be the ones 'imposing a ruling'.

Something that the rules do talk about is giving extra XP for those who play well to their character's motivation. I'm genuinely curious to know how those in the absentee XP camp feel about that.

Ruling as in decision made by the GM, not rules. I openly said earlier if it works at your table then great, I’m more responding to the other poster now for constant misrepresentation of everything I say.

19 minutes ago, TwitchyBait said:

Oh look another straw man, honest discussion that difficult aye?

Not at all.

But, it takes more than one person to have one. And since you keep diverting the discussion I’ve been trying to have with you about the foolish notion that absent players not receiving XP is a “punishment” and instead go on and on about the nature of character advancement, that does, indeed, make it difficult.

Talk about your straw men....

34 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Not at all.

But, it takes more than one person to have one. And since you keep diverting the discussion I’ve been trying to have with you about the foolish notion that absent players not receiving XP is a “punishment” and instead go on and on about the nature of character advancement, that does, indeed, make it difficult.

Talk about your straw men....

You asked how it makes it a punishment, the reasoning was everything was made slightly more difficult for an action they took (not coming) resulting in an optional consequence by the GM that put them behind the rest of the party you didn’t seem to like this answer or simply choose to ignore it and repeat the question. It’s obvious you’re just trolling so think I’m happily done wasting my time with you.

Also talk about my straw man? I ever made an argument for you, you however lied repeatedly about me first suggesting I never answered and changed the subject because you didn’t like my answer then suggesting my original response was to someone it wasn’t then claiming I thought all GMs who thought differently where bad or evil when I never suggested such a thing. But sure ok you got me

2 hours ago, TwitchyBait said:

Ruling as in decision made by the GM, not rules

Sorry, your use of the word 'imposing' made it sound like no show = no XP was some new concept. It's not. It was the default for at least a couple of decades. My bad if I misunderstood.

I'm still curious about how you feel about bonus XP for good roleplayers, as the rules suggest. Do you feel that that punishes people who aren't as good at adhering to their established Motivations?

I don't do bonus xp for roleplaying. I do give a bonus to reducing Obligation for good roleplaying (and I've used Obligation with all of my FFG SW games).

I've incorporated microtransactions at my table.

You want XP? I want a sandwich.

10 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

Rimsen had stated that, at their table, XP is not received by players who aren’t present. You proceeded to excoriate such settings. “Awful tables,” you called them, suggesting that such scenarios treat XP as “participation trophies.”

For someone who keeps admonishing others about poor reading comprehension, you sure do seem bothered by people who do comprehend what you’re saying, but don’t agree.

Thank you Nytwyng, but I think he is either a troll or just ironicly lacks the much quoted reading comprehension. I don't think THIS conversation worth more energy.

Though I'm still happy to argue about the XP of missing players.

54 minutes ago, Rimsen said:

Thank you Nytwyng, but I think he is either a troll or just ironicly lacks the much quoted reading comprehension. I don't think THIS conversation worth more energy.

Though I'm still happy to argue about the XP of missing players.

Yeah, I've been thinking the same thing. And was mentally composing a similar post. (Certainly, the actual meaning of the word "punishment" seems to be lost on him.) But, instead of actually typing it out, I'll just say, "Yep...not worth it," predict the inevitable, "See? I won, because you ran away!" strut that I'll have to resist the urge to respond to, and continue conversation with people who won't respond to Topic A by repeatedly saying, "Topic B. B. B! B B B B! Idiot, I said B!"

9 hours ago, Vorzakk said:

Sorry, your use of the word 'imposing' made it sound like no show = no XP was some new concept. It's not. It was the default for at least a couple of decades. My bad if I misunderstood.

I'm still curious about how you feel about bonus XP for good roleplayers, as the rules suggest. Do you feel that that punishes people who aren't as good at adhering to their established Motivations?

No worries hard to convey meaning sometimes over mere text. I used to do it back in my early GMing days but not anymore. I typically reward it differently ie a player makes a rousing speech, a convincing lie, a charming line etc I throw a bonus die or two their way for the check. If the role playing doesn’t aid the context of a check I might flip a destiny point in the players favor.

It's been a while, so I'm awarding 1000XP to everyone reading this thread. But I don't award XP to those that don't show up. And -5XP to all of you not living by Wyld Stallyons rules. Shame on you.

14 hours ago, themensch said:

It's been a while, so I'm awarding 1000XP to everyone reading this thread. But I don't award XP to those that don't show up. And -5XP to all of you not living by Wyld Stallyons rules. Shame on you.

Be excellent to each other!

I give 5 XP as the base for a game session. 10 XP for doing something exceptional. 15 XP is awesome play/Max XP for a session. If they miss a session it's not gonna kill them.

There are 11 pages of comments here so if someone else has said this already sorry for the repeat.

If it's a rare occurrence just give them the EXP, it's a game and there is no reason to make a big deal about a player missing a session or two over the course of a campaign. They probably wanted to make it but couldn't for some good reason no point in adding to the fact they didn't get to play that session. It's only likely 10-20EXP anyway so give it to them. If it's a common thing, they miss sessions all the time, then you have different problem and what you do with EXP isn't going to fix that.

On 4/20/2019 at 3:21 AM, Archlyte said:

I give 5 XP as the base for a game session. 10 XP for doing something exceptional. 15 XP is awesome play/Max XP for a session. If they miss a session it's not gonna kill them.

It's my idea, or this is exactly the advice given in Star Wars D6, 1st? 👍

33 minutes ago, Rithuan said:

It's my idea, or this is exactly the advice given in Star Wars D6, 1st? 👍

In D6, that would be a lot of points.

1 hour ago, Rithuan said:

It's my idea, or this is exactly the advice given in Star Wars D6, 1st? 👍

I would say I got it from you if you posted it because I didn't play the d6 system. I'm an old gamer but for some reason I don't like d6 systems, Traveller is the only one I ever played to any large degree. But anyway I will totally give you credit.

There are some interesting things mentioned across all those pages but the baseline should always be: Do what works at your table.

Right now I partake in 2 Groups (one with 4 persons and one with 5) across 3 Systems, but we all are so busy with RL in general that it is a bit hard to settle down dates that all can show up. We are faaar away from meeting weekly or even twice a month as we did some years back.

To top this off we are a bit prone to sidetracking at the table as we also don't see each other all too often outside of gaming. So getting "something done" is an integral point of our sessions and having at least some progression even when one couldn't make room for the date is also somewhat needed to prevent the feeling of a stalling game. This gets even more important if the time between sessions is like a whole month and someone just couldn't make it to one of those sessions.

My Groups pretty much on their own divide the money they earn between all characters and especially in SW the one missing usually "guards the Ship". So the Chars are there and they gain Credits as well as XP and it works great. No one thinks this is cheap XP - actually when someone can't show up it's more sadness than anything else.

In olden times when we quite frequently met for sessions, it was the norm to don't get anything when not showing up but with the way it runs now this would just produce giant gaps in XP and credits in a game that is already very slow compared to real-time - and my tables won't want that. On the other hand, it's possible that we just grow old and give less f****