Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5840169" data-attributes="member: 6668292">I don't think these are necessarily generally objectionable. Fleeing might be less acceptable in this situation. Much as combat is sometimes less acceptable in some situations, as it will almost certainly get you killed.If all the players have an understanding that it's expected to make decisions from the perspective of "what my character would do" (exactly as the mercenary PC is doing) and not make a meta-decision to help out just because he's a PC, then it would be going against the understood social contract to do what you're proposing.That'd be disrupting to this style of game. It's fine to do what your preference is, but to call them "game-disrupting players" because they don't follow your preference in gaming style, and are in fact making decisions with the exact same criteria as the the mercenary PC, is probably wrong.If they're all going to be making decisions in-character, that's fair. The mercenary understandably doesn't have backup. If they're all going to be making decisions from a meta-standpoint, then the mercenary's player should cooperate, so as not to complicate relations with the town where the other players want to keep working.Either way, I wouldn't describe the rest of the players as "game-disrupting".The PC indicated that he was leaving town, and would most likely leave the area. Yeah, he could notice a new threat. He may or may not want to tell the town that tried to arrest him, that he just fled from. I wouldn't bank on it, but it might work if the player cooperates. As he's currently leaving the party, and is a mercenary/brigand, I wouldn't count on it, personally.Both of whom said they would assume he's guilty, and I'm betting would attempt to bring him in. If the mercenary can be excused for "acting in character" and leaving, the town guard and ranger should be able to "act in character" when they run across him. My bet is on PvP as of that point, the PC letting the mercenary get away, or the mercenary voluntarily going in (and is arrested nonetheless).If they're going to come at this from a meta-standpoint (he's a PC!), then the mercenary should have tried to keep relations with the town as smooth as possible. Locked up for a bit, while the other PCs tried to prove his innocence. This way things with the town remain smooth.I still don't see how the other players are "game-disrupting" or how the GM is railroading.Here's a couple quotes from the original poster about what his players said:So, I say "Players B, C, and D: "I'm not planning on following, and won't support you if you go."" You say: "THis is also not what was said."I have to disagree.Yes, it was what he said. From the situation given from the original poster (which I can quote if you'd like), the mercenary had little reason to stay. He had no "vested interest in the town or allies". The other PCs would have taken his running as a sign of guilt, and wouldn't follow him or support him if he left.This is exactly what's been described to us. I've quoted it. You've said it hasn't been said. I can requote it, if necessary.I've paraphrased. However, I did quote every place that I drew it from. It's there, easily color-coded, for you to read.Personally, I think you have a preference on how players should act. It doesn't match up with how this group plays. It does not make the players "game-disrupting players" (especially since the mercenary would likely do the same, if "acting in character" called for it). It does not mean that the GM is railroading the game.Yeah, the GM could attempt a heavy-handed solution. Then again, he also had this to say when someone mentioned using a heavy-handed solution to potentially keep the mercenary in town if he had tried to flee:The guy probably wouldn't have been happy to run into the ranger or town guard PCs if they planned on taking him in. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification