I've just been made the conductor...

[MarkB]

Well, I guess it's my own fault for not giving more information.

This is in my World's Largest Dungeon game. The garrison is run by Angels - their commander is a planetar. Senile/stupid isn't really going to work.

Actually, my problem isn't really with sending them out to do the things they need to do. That's fine. They want to help and that's not an issue. My problem is more along the finer points of military life. For example, the halfing paladin/monk of Ehlonna decides, in a lull in the conversation with said Planatar that he feels sleepy and heads off to bed. Doesn't ask, doesn't really say anything other than "Gnight".

Now, this isn't going to fly in a highly lawful army. I'm letting him off with a warning this time, but, I'm afraid of other things like this coming up and having to slap down the PC's for it.

The commander is, presumably, highly intelligent, and has a broader perspective than the PCs. He knows that they're not going to be under his command indefinitely, and that breaking them to military discipline may stifle the very talents that make them useful. Better to just take them as they are, and give them assignments that keep them well away from the regular troops so that they don't 'corrupt' them with their unlawful ways.

 

[Hussar]

Hang on a tick here.

When a subordinate just turns away from the garrison commander without so much as a by your leave, I'm perfectly in my rights to have him killed. Ok, maybe not killed, but certainly punished. You do not leave the presence of your commander without permission. Period. The party are not ranking, they are new recruits. They are on the bottom of the food chain rank wise.

While I don't know about other country's militaries, I do know that if I pulled that stunt in front of my CO, I'd be hearing about it PDQ.

Now you see the bind that I'm in. Do I enforce what I see as a legitimate claim by the ranks to what they consider their subordinates, or do I simply handwave it away and ignore it?

 

[shilsen]

Hang on a tick here.

When a subordinate just turns away from the garrison commander without so much as a by your leave, I'm perfectly in my rights to have him killed. Ok, maybe not killed, but certainly punished. You do not leave the presence of your commander without permission. Period. The party are not ranking, they are new recruits. They are on the bottom of the food chain rank wise.

Killed? You really think it would be justifiable for a planetar to have a new recruit killed because he left a meeting without permission? I'm all for flexibility and ambiguity with alignment, but that's a bit much.

Just have some other NPCs or a mid-ranking superior tell the PCs what is acceptable and what isn't at the fortress.

 

[LostSoul]

Try and use it to get the players to make some interesting choices.

Do they have anything that would make them question orders? Other competing interests? Try and put strain on those.

A simple one would be like this: One PC has family in a town that's going to be overrun by baddies. The PCs could easily get there, and probably put a stop to it (level appropriate adventure), but their orders are to go somewhere else. What do you do?

Another way, I guess, which might not fly (since the commander is a frickin Angel! ), is to have the commander issue orders that are out of whack with the player's sense of morality. What's more important - following orders, or doing what's right? Are you capable of making that choice for yourself when your commander is a better being than you are?

That could make for some interesting play.

 

[Agback]

The garrison is run by Angels - their commander is a planetar.

I think that it is a mistake to include NPCs who are more capable and more steadfast than the PCs unless those NPCs are a) not concerned with the issues that dominate the PCs' adventures or b) are to at least some extent at odds with the PCs. You have in short overshadowed your central characters with minor characters.

I would suggest hitting the silk. Get the PCs out of there pronto. Have their angelic CO send them on a scouting mission, or a raid, or to carry a desperate plea for help, or something, and have the battle fought and won/lost by the time they get back. Hope that they never think to ask why the planetar didn't do whatever-it-is himself or herself in the twinkling of a bedpost.

 

[MarkB]

Hang on a tick here.

When a subordinate just turns away from the garrison commander without so much as a by your leave, I'm perfectly in my rights to have him killed. Ok, maybe not killed, but certainly punished. You do not leave the presence of your commander without permission. Period. The party are not ranking, they are new recruits. They are on the bottom of the food chain rank wise.

unless your PCs have been through a full military training programme, it is unreasonable for the commander to expect them to act like soldiers.

Unless your players have been through a full military training programme, it is unreasonable for the DM to expect them to play their characters letter-perfect as soldiers.

If it bothers you, mention it to them out of character, say you'll be a bit more strict about it in future, and move on.

 

[Byrons_Ghost]

I agree with MarkB. Both the characters and players are going to have different expectations of IC military life than your own, and you're all going to have to hash them out.

The "gnight" thing is probably a bad example, though, as it's the kind of minutae that gets beaten to death on message boards. In general I would either send the PCs on a mission ASAP, or re-examine the assassination idea.

Even with a planetar. Trust me, the more badass the NPC, the more shocking it will be to the PCs when a demon rips out his heart in the middle of a meeting.

 

[Hatchling Dragon]

Perhaps the Commander would see this opportunity for what it is, the chance to fight fire with fire. The war in the WLD has been raging for a long time, mostly as a stalemate I'm betting. Unfortunately things don't look good for the Garrison in the long-term. The commander would be smart enough to realise this, as well as wise enough to take advantage of whatever tools present themselfs.

This brings us to the advent of the Group. Unless they're very unusual they're a bit on the Chaotic side, rarely fighting with structure and pre-planning. This style, while successfull in the right circumstances (they made it this far), may not be the best fit for meshing with the more rigid Garrison forces. Rather than waste the much-needed power represented by the group he decides to 'detach' them on missions that his own forces either wouldn't be suited for, or that he just can't spare enough troops to be sure of success.

They've shown thier resourcefullness by getting to this point, and they're an unknown to the enemy, an advantage the Garrison forces can't claim for thier own. They're used to working with each other, while the group and Garrison would have to start developing the trust needed to realy work together.

Besides, supporting thier efforts (information, safe base camp, ect...) is far cheaper, not to mention safer, than it would be if he were to try integrating them into his own forces. They're easily thought of as a sort of "Special Forces" group, a waste to dilute that amongst the 'grunts'.

Sorry, got a bit long-winded. Hope it's not too little or too late.

 

[LostSoul]

Should I gloss over consequences if they choose to ignore orders? Should I play this to the hilt and simply order them to do this or that?

Tell them out of game (you know, as people) that you'd like to see them ignore orders. There will be consequences, but they will be cool, and they won't end the game. The consequences will just make the game more fun.

 

[Agback]

While I don't know about other country's militaries, I do know that if I pulled that stunt in front of my CO, I'd be hearing about it PDQ.

But would you be killed? Or would you get cashiered/a BCD?