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: 5840843" data-attributes="member: 6668292">That's not the point. My players often don't know which are the better options when they pick one. They have best guesses, and are usually correct. But I wouldn't confront them and tell them "don't worry, it's a push-over anyways."Two things, here:1) The mercenary PC might be forfeiting his PC by surrendering. When he announced that he was running, the GM asked his players about support if he did, and they didn't support it. He is most certainly forfeiting him if he runs.2) We don't know their perceptions of the mercenary. They might see him as a mercenary, in it for the money, with no investment in the town. He seems not to have much, according to the original poster and player, so that perception doesn't seem unreasonable.No. That's why I called it "heavy-handed":Yeah. Heavy-handed.Hope that clears it up for you. They both are. He appears to dislike things being forced upon him. He seems, based on the original post, to be pointed in a direction he can follow, through "hints" from the GM. Not put on the spot in a heavy-handed way.I'm being consistent here. Maybe you missed it. 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=":)" />Consequences can go both ways, of course. The PCs are perceived to do something for someone, they get rewarded. The PCs are perceived to do something against someone, they get confronted. This seems to make sense to me, unless they're too powerful to be confronted (also a possibility).We do know, however, that the PC most likely wasn't planning on clearing his name. If he did, some interesting stuff could unfold, indeed.There's no reason this couldn't be the case. It could be heavy-handed, or it could naturally unfold from her feelings. I think it's probably somewhere in between.Saying "my character is leaving" and having the other players say "I won't support you if you leave" means, yeah, he's gone. That seems very straightforward, and I don't see the GM's being the one enforcing it upon the player.This is because of the other players, not the GM. They effectively told him that they don't support him in running, and he said he'd most likely leave the area, since he has no strong ties. GM isn't forcing it at all in this picture.But, I would say that the woman's claim and the whole situation was pretty heavy handed. I already said that. That's my view about a lot of adventure path material, though. I think it was only exacerbated when the GM took that material and pushed it more in favor of a preferred outcome. 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=":)" />I agree with the sentiment (if the GM wants the players to avoid this in the future). The players should have made characters that would have each other's backs from the get-go, in my opinion. That's on all of them. The GM should have made sure it was the case, in my opinion. It takes an honest effort from the GM to make it happen, but the real onus is on the players. They need to make it so that "acting in character" and "supporting the party" make sense together, at least in a grand sense.That doesn't mean they have to always agree or get along. But it should mean that the party is a truthful place. If he says "I didn't do it," then he didn't do it, and you believe it. If he says "I'm against us going through with this," then he's against it, and there's conflict, but it's well communicated, and a compromise might need to be struck. 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