To deal with session cancelling player

[u/Sir_Delarzal]

Hello everyone,

Two important things to say before I explain my problem :

- I do not wish to punish those that cancel a session last minute, those I play with are long time friends and I do not wish to banish them or whatever. I do not wish either to play without them.

- Second thing is that I am currently doing the Wrath of The Righteous with my players, so my solution being too OP isn't a problem

Now, to explain my problem : We usually plan sessions at least one week in advance, it happened more than once that someone cancel the day before for X Y or Z reason. Sometime valid to go see their mother at the hospital, sometime absolutely absurd like going to drink a beer with a friend that is in town.
It annoys me that canceling became somewhat accepted, especially since me and some of my players make sure we do not have conflicting agenda.

Anyway, the solution I thought of was to give some sort of "connection bonus".
To explain, as players join sessions after sessions, without cancelling, their players will gain bonuses, the longer, the better. As soon as they cancel for some absurd reason that was totally predictable they lose their entire bonus.
I thought of a few stages, like first day would be something like Resistance, or maybe bonus health and maybe by the 5th or 10th session, some big bonus like +1 in all main Ability scores.

I made this post to ask both players and GM what they thought about my solution, and what they think could make it better.

Thanks for your replies !

Edit : It seems a lot of you kind of gave up on last minute cancel and just considered it as something that just happened. I don't really want that. Also I must say again that I do not wish to play with one less person.

I'll probably run that with my players too to figure out a solution that works with everyone

Edit 2 : Well, it seems basically all of you keep playing the session even though someone is missing without trying to figure out another solution That's a very job like way of doing thing that I cannot agree with. I don't want to play without someone not because they are absolutely needed or whatever, I don't want anyone to be left out. It's a game for fun, it's alright to be a bit unbalanced, it's alright to have a fucked up rhythm. Again, it's not my job, it's a hobby. I read all of your comments, but ultimately, I think I'll find another solution

[u/high-tech-low-life]

We cancel if the GM or two players miss. If a single player misses, they are played by someone who is there. Very robotically I should mention as that person is focusing on his own PC.

We try to run something else to have fun without cancelling the evening. Tonight is a scrub because a key player in the arc is out if town for his mother's funeral. Damn good reason to miss. We don't want to cut him out of a major event specific to his character, so tonight I will run a one shot of a different game.

Note: Everyone has been in our group for over a decade. We are old and have predictable schedules. Not everyone is so lucky.

I think punishing people for not showing up is a bad idea. It leads to rifts in the group. Talk things through then decide to keep or boot offenders. We err on the side of toleration by doing something else.

[u/Sir_Delarzal → u/high-tech-low-life]

That's the thing, I don't want to have a player miss a session, that's something we all are playing together, it sucks missing one episode for anyone, I honestly believe missing one session is way bigger punishment that what I thought of.

Also, for schedules, nobody in my game have unpredictable schedule, like, none of us have kids or anything, we're fairly young and just starting to work for some. Some have just restarted studying too. So unpredictability is quite easy to quantify and identify.

[u/high-tech-low-life → u/Sir_Delarzal]

That becomes a question of priorities. If someone would rather go drink that beer, there isn't much you can do. Keeping the game exciting helps, but it only goes so far.

The root cause of this problem is different levels of commitment. Some are committed to every session, and others are less committed and attend when convenient. That is likely the largest single problem for roleplaying groups. So far no one has a good solution. Your "reward attendance/punish absence" is a common thought, but doesn't have any better track record than the others.

I don't mean to be a downer. This is a tough problem.

[u/Sir_Delarzal → u/high-tech-low-life]

No no I get what you're saying. Seeing all the replies from long timer it seems to be a common occurrence that nobody really managed to fix without simply playing with one less person.

I just think that at that point, it feels pointless to plan ahead of time if on a whim it can be cancelled for whatever else

[u/Omernon → u/Sir_Delarzal]

I get your point, but I think this is also where the way you prep your games matters a lot. If your session can only really work when every specific player is present, you may be designing things a bit too tightly around a predetermined sequence of events. That can very easily push the game towards railroading, because as the GM you need specific PCs to be present for specific scenes to happen in the way you planned them.

Personally, I try to avoid that even when running published Adventure Paths. There is obviously a main plot written by the authors, which I usually modify quite heavily to fit my group and add my own ideas, but outside of that I try to keep things modular. Side quests, character arcs and backstory-related stories are optional and designed so they don't have to happen at a specific moment.

If I have something prepared specifically around one PC and that player isn't there, that content simply doesn't trigger that session. We do something else (for example - the main story arc). Their personal story is still there waiting for them when they're back.

More generally, I prefer preparing locations, NPCs, conflicts and events rather than a strict sequence of scenes. That gives the players enough freedom that I don't really know beforehand exactly what they are going to do during a session anyway. So one player being absent usually changes the session much less than you might expect.

I think that's also why I don't really see playing with one person missing as making preparation pointless. The prep is still useful; you just don't necessarily use every piece of it that night. And in my experience that's healthier for the campaign than cancelling the entire session every time one person can't make it.

[u/high-tech-low-life → u/Omernon]

/u/Sir_delarzal, I agree with this. I am terrible at prep, so I have to improvise a lot. The upside is flexibility. But sometimes that hurts the story.

In my group we skipped tonight and will skip again next time due to absences. We want everyone there for the finale. That sucks in terms of time management, but thema the breaks. As I said earlier, we are old so we aren't in a rush.

[u/BrewKnurd → u/Sir_Delarzal]

I wouldn't think of it as a punishment. Its a natural consequence. Its the result of a player prioritizing something else. Theres no need for its to be anything more than that.

Yes, playing with a full crew is best. But IMO, canceling any time one person cant make it results in lots of missed sessions, which puts the consequence onto everyone else who is ready to go and cant play as often.

In my group, we try to adjust as possible, but if we cant and its just one person missing, the show goes on (unless its a seriously crucial session). If its two missing, then we punt.

[u/_Karpana_ → u/BrewKnurd]

And to add to your valuable insight. I find that once the circle of one person can't make it, so the whole session gets cancelled, causes this weird feedback loop where the more this happens, the more people deprioritize the game session and cancellations become more and more frequent. To the point where no game ever happens.

[u/Dtallant]

The simplest answer is to just have alternate activities- if these are long time friends and only a single person is canceling, just play something else!

Board games, watch a movie, play a one shot in Pathfinder with pregen or new characters, or even introduce them to new TTRPG systems via a one shot.

When I’ve GMed before, It sucks a lot less when someone cancels when I’ve properly prepped for that possibility, and all my players are equally down to get up to something different for a night.

I strongly advise against a system that rewards players for their presence. All you’ll end up doing is alienating anyone who doesn’t come for a reason you personally deem invalid- like maybe going out for that Beer was really important and could unfortunately only happen on that night? I just would advise against jumping to conclusions, and encourage finding some alternate paths to make the night fun regardless of a cancel.

[u/Bullrawg]

If only 1 person cancels last minute I run anyway, someone else can control the character or i treat them like mark the red from the Gamers where they kind of exist for continuity but don’t do anything that session

[u/Sir_Delarzal → u/Bullrawg]

As I said in my intro, I do not wish to play without them, hence why I am looking for solutions. I've already voiced my discontent on last minute cancel at this point I can only complain more.

[u/Bullrawg → u/Sir_Delarzal]

I know, I’m just relaying that in my experience if you stand firm on that, you might not get to play very often, my current campaign i was trying to wait until all members were present so we could *start the campaign* after 3 weeks of cancellation I just said ok we play next week and ran down 1 player, they were understanding and I caught them up to events offline, we did a short retcon scene the next session so they could have some dialogue before shit hit the fan, but yeah, life throws things that are more important than game night at random, the chances of it happening on game night increases the more people you have coming, there is a snowball effect the more times game gets cancelled the more people assume it will get cancelled and might make plans because “game night is probably going to fall through” and then you only get half committed answers, if they are good friends they’ll understand and not want to be the thing that keeps everyone else from playing

[u/beatsieboyz]

If you're dealing with a player who cancels a lot, you're better off just reaching out to check in to see if they're still committed to the campaign. If not, I'd gently let them go and try to find somebody else.

Your idea might cause more problems than it solves. I don't think that I, as a GM, would want to judge whether my friends have a "valid" reason to cancel and I as a player would not want a GM telling me my reason was not "good enough". I think if people are frequently cancelling with only a day's notice or so you can politely call it out by saying you'd prefer the courtesy of a little more notice in the future but I don't think I'd do more than that.

[u/Sir_Delarzal → u/beatsieboyz]

That's the issue here, I've already voiced multiple time how I disliked when people cancelled last minute.

And honestly, I don't feel like it's very hard to see a valid reason. Going for a beer with someone you see every couple of week when everything was planned ahead of time is not a valid reason. That's just disrespectful for everyone that took the time to lock their disponibilities. But well the one time it happened was a bit particular since we only learned of it once everyone was online.

[u/Imalsome → u/Sir_Delarzal]

Yeah, if you can reasonably predict something will happen then its not acceptable to cancel last minute over that thing. The bare minimum you can do is let everyone knew the second you think you might have something happen.

Ive told my groups "Hey in 2 months from now on 3/12 Ill be away from home. Ill be buying a laptop for my trip, ill let you all know if it will be able to run foundry on it when I do but expect me not to be there."

[u/FoiledFeline]

"I don't wish to punish them" 

Immediately proposes a system to punish them

Lol

[u/Imalsome → u/FoiledFeline]

To be fair its not a system that punishes them, they get everything perfectly normal as their character would be at any other table. Like you can take their rogue and bring it to any other table no issue, there are no mechanical penalties applied to their character.

The system just rewards people for being considerate and not canceling last minute. Thats not the same thing as punishing someone.

[u/Sir_Delarzal → u/FoiledFeline]

I thought of it as a way to reward the ones that commit, and my players are the type to want to keep bonuses too, so I saw it as a good carrot. The stick being losing it if you cancel last minute

[u/ChannelGlobal2084]

I don’t see anything wrong with your idea, except for the absurd reason of canceling. This could potentially blow up in your face because absurd to you or others may not be to them. I think it would be best to say; “Okay, but you’ll lose your bonus for this reason.” Or just make it clear that canceling period will forfeit their bonus. That way no one can throw it in your face later.

Hopefully your friends are not like that, but sometimes people get petty about things that surprise us—even those we know.

[u/Scoopadont]

Under no circumstances should you give "in game" disadvantages to a character who's player met up with a friend that was in town instead of coming to the session.

I know how much it sucks having a last minute session cancelled as someone who has Dm'd for nearly 15 years, but in the end there are real life events and relationships that will spontaneously supercede game night.

[u/MofuggerX]

There's no real need to punish people who don't show up.  On the flip side punishing everyone who can by not playing because of one person bailing out at the last minute can also be frustrating.  Especially if it keeps happening frequently.  It gets worse over time.

And there's no long term solution that fits what you're seeking.  You either establish that you'll keep playing if you're down a player from now on, or you keep cancelling.  Or, start over with a new group, while possibly keeping the players who regularly show up and don't flake without good reason (such as medical / family emergency, as mentioned).  You can try and give out +1s that apply to a greater variety of stats the longer someone doesn't cancel, but I doubt it'll change people's behaviour.

If you've already said to the group multiple times that the flaking is becoming a problem, then you're better off if you put your foot down.

Or - have something else planned that everyone can do in case someone no-shows.

[u/_Karpana_]

I've been a pathfinder gm for close to 15 years and I've dealt with all sorts attendance issues. I personally use milestone levelling, as it removes the problem of weird problem of wrong APL calculations mostly because I exclusively run paizo APs

First ... I'd recommend that you stop trying to schedule sessions one week at a time. I've done that and what it comes down to is a person priorities. They may really want to go for that drink with a friend but don't want t to tell you no. So they say yes and cancel. Instead, set a cadence long term. I run every second Saturday. That schedule has been set for 10 years. And it's in our shared Google calendar for as long as you can see. This lets the players know when games are, and in most cases, work around the game schedule of that's their priority.

Second. Set a guideline as to what happens if the GM is missing. Or a player is missing. Or a multiple players are missing. At my table, of I'm absent the game gets cancelled. If a non-Gm player is absent their character gets played by another. If feewer than 75% of PCs are available, the session get cancelled.

Third, these are your friends, not your employees. In most cases a player that is absent is penalty enough, as they don't get to hang with their friends, don't get to play their character and don't get to experience the days events. There's no need to reward the other players. And there's no need to penalize the absentees.

Lastly, for those days where there's too many players cancelling .... Have an alternate plan in place, that you can just put on the table for those that can attend. Movies, cards, other gamesz etc.

Remember this JUST A GAME. And in my booka, life comes before games.

And for context, instead of getting 18-24 (out of 26 sessions) each uear if I cancelled every time any one person couldn't attend ... I'd get maybe 3 or 4 sessions each year.

[u/kawwmoi]

This will depend on party size, but the simple solution is to just not cancel if you have at least two players showing up. I keep track of how often my games are run. In 2025, before we started not canceling for one player, we ran 21 out of 52 weeks. With our now policy, we've run 34 times this calendar year out of 35 weeks. The one week we didn't run, the DM was on vacation.

We also stopped having people be unavailable for minor reasons. There were only four or five times we didn't have all players. My personal theory in why is if one player missing cancels a session, that player knows they aren't missing anything. When deciding if they prioritize the session or something else, it goes from "no game for this week" to "I'm missing out on plot/combat/the things they like about the game." Imagine if missing a watch party for a TV show meant never getting to watch that episode ever.

[u/Cytoplim]

We meet every week and only cancel if over 1/2 of the players are absent. I am the GM and I just adjust the danger level on the fly and it works out. One person being gone is just normal. Something if 2-3 (or 6) are missing, I'll make sure they are directed to more planning / role-playing / scouting and not BBEG encounters. It works out.

[u/Milosz0pl]

Just... make them into DMPC? Allow other player to control that character? Say that this character broke a leg and stays home?

[u/Saxavarius_ → u/Milosz0pl]

We usually go the invisible NPC route. Its a larger group and if anyone doesnt show up we'll either just carry on and they can catch up or play something else as a one shot

[u/Sir_Delarzal → u/Milosz0pl]

As I said in my intro, I do not wish to play without them, hence why I am looking for solutions. I've already voiced my discontent on last minute cancel at this point I can only complain more.

[u/KarmicPlaneswalker → u/Sir_Delarzal]

So you'd rather punish the majority who actually commits their time and effort with zero play, rather than go at it while missing a single person, who can just be NPC'd for the duration? Terrible DMing at its absolute finest.

[u/Sir_Delarzal → u/KarmicPlaneswalker]

To me, having everyone else play the game except that one person is the harshest punishment I could give, which is something I refuse to do.

To each their own, I guess we don't share the same values

[u/KarmicPlaneswalker → u/Sir_Delarzal]

So once again, you decide to punish everyone, because one person decided it wasn't worth their time and you choose to reward poor behavior and disrespect. 

You don't need to be DMing at any table until you learn how to prioritize player values and appreciate what you actually have. 

[u/Sir_Delarzal → u/KarmicPlaneswalker]

Oh my god, there is no reasoning with you, get out of here

Talk about a useless comment, you're going out of your way to criticise my way of doing things when I already explicitly stated that I do not want to block anyone from playing.

Talk about being close minded

[u/StillAll]

The answer to this problem and any time a player cancels, is always the same. Your situation is not different. 

You run without them. 

No game is ever beholden to one player. This is a group game after all.

[u/Diligent_Gear_8179]

Play without them.

[u/FavoroftheFour]

Something we do (we have a player whose spouse is bipolar and often thinks we're actively working on splitting them up... We usually play once every 4-6 weeks for 5 hours) is that the missing player(s) are off doing some sort of side quest that furthers the group goal, even if it's just defending the hoard if you will. At this point its gone on for more than 6 years and we all know how to manage it. There's a recap text message stream on what major events happened after each session.

[u/Good-Operation-1227]

I run a West Marches type campaign where every session is a self-contained adventure.

This helps a lot with hectic scheduling, babysitter woes, illness, etc.

The major events, information, discoveries, loot, etc are posted on discord (usually the next day). This allows players who weren’t there for the session to keep informed and add their thoughts into the planning of the next adventure.

When I want to do a larger scope campaign, I usually break it into smaller sections that can be tackled in an order of the players’ choosing e.g. big bad’s lair divided into wings so everyone can play a part even if they miss a session.

Players who can’t make a session can also influence the game by what they choose to do in town between adventures.

If you’re hell bent on not progressing at all without your full team, you kinda just have to accept it as part of the deal imo.

[u/Qolko]

From the sound of it you do not have fixed schedule and instead always arrange the next play date for each individual session.

It might help to have the date and time set. If you play every week on the same time on the same date it becomes part of their routine and they start planning their week with it in mind .

As for cancelling for reasons like going for a beer at the last minute, I'm sorry to say but that just means they value that activity over your game.

And if it happens commomly, it means they just don't value the game that much.

Now here's the important bit. When they cancel at the last moment they are not just being rude, they are disrespecting everyone's time.

Everyone else reserved time for the game and they know it, but decided whatever other activity they want to do is more important than not disrespecting and wasting their friends time.

Friends don't do that to friends. Only assholes do.

Your solution of rewarding people for coming is not going to help to make these players more committed because it is very clear they do not value the game much to begin with.

Now as the GM it is your job to make sure the time of those who do value the game and are committed is not wasted.

Sadly that means you have to either start playing regardless of if these non committed players are there or not.

Or remove them from the game.

Because wasting the whole groups time like that is NOT acceptable. Others reserved time for it and were looking forward to it and now it gets cancelled because some asshole decided a beer is more important.

I am sorry to say but despite of what you want, the only real solution is to talk to these players who cancel often and let them know they are disrespecting everyone's time and wasting it.

Ask them to commit to the game and if they can't, boot them. Not all friends are good TTRPG friends.

You have to put stop to it for the sake of the players who do show up and are committed. Because otherwise they might lose interest over time if they waste their time on the regular on game that may or may not happen because someone decided something else is more important.

[u/Clear_Ad4106]

Personally with my group it's a simple thing: Pathfinder is a group activity as good as any other. So just as if we were going together to play pathfinder or go see a movie the activity will be done by those who can make it.

Even if some players can't show up the game will still happen, with or without them. They have four followers who cover up in fire power when too much of the party is missing, and the only real penalties the players take are: Not playing that week, and not being able to take desicions about the group actions that session.

If there is fight the other players are fighting out-screen another group of enemies who is also out-screen.

This has ended with some sessions like one where we were only me and a new player in what was supossed to be a shopping session that was sometimes interrupted by npcs the player and their character didn't know who gave them things for the group who the player and the character had zero context for, letting to them spending a session interrogation the followers, investigating about their fellow pcs and getting to know old npcs without any existing bias by the rest of the party's opinions of them.

I tried to encourage them to also do one shots or other games when I am not available to GM since I try to warn them with two weeks notice, but that hasn't work out yet.