I don’t know if this is a weird thing to ask.
However, my group consists of 5 Players and our DM. They’re great people and every Session is a lot of fun, ngl. The issue I’m having is that -for whatever reason- everyone (except me apparently) refuses to even think about playing if one of the Players isn’t attending.
Scheduling is difficult even when accepting losses. But only playing when everyone can attend, makes it impossible and I really don’t want a Campaign that runs once a month, if we’re lucky. Maybe I am just in my bubble since I have rather flexible working times.
But I just cannot understand, why one, or even two players being absent, would be a huge problem. I’ve been DMming myself for a while, rebalancing is annoying, but not impossible, even on the fly. A PC could be played by the DM or the PC does something in their Downtime while the group does something else, which explains why they aren’t there. For a big and important story arch, I would understand that everyone should ideally be there but even then one player not being there wouldn’t kill anyone. Especially since the Campaign is made in mind that players and PC’s are interchangeable and until now we haven’t gotten to a point where it was fundamentally important that everyone was there… If three players (more than 50%) can’t make it, then yeah, I understand cancelling a Session. But certainly not at 1-2 Players out of 5.
I just kinda want to hear your opinion. Either I am dumb for thinking that way, or I am not the only one here thinking that way