So I feel like I'm in a bit of a pickle. During a pretty routine smuggling operation, the bounty hunter decided to try and blast the customs official who was inspecting their ship. Long story short, the official escaped (after getting a good look at the entire party), and the group took off and shot down a pursuing cloud car, which crashed into the city. :/

So that was unexpected. They've set their ship down in a canyon near town. They're planning to try and rent a truck to move the goods from the ship into the town, but I'm worried about splitting the party. Basically, they are going to want to leave someone with the ship, and I would hate to have to run all the sneaking past the guards, finding and negotiating for a truck, etc, while one or more characters babysits the landed ship.

So, any suggestions on how I can realistically keep the party together as they try and recover from their colossal bungle?

Perhaps the canyon was chosen because one of the PCs knows one of the locals (a farmer or rancher or prospector). Someone you can sincerely tell them they trust (PC saved their daughter or summut). Someone who owes them a favour (like babysitting their ship).

Feel free to charge them a destiny point for this (if it has cost them something they'll be less inclined to be suspicious of it).

Hmm, might be hard because we've established through some knowledge rolls previously that the group has never even heard about this planet. Good suggestion in general to suggest them to use Destiny points. Of course, it would be just my luck that I would roll all Dark side destiny to start the session off...

I wouldn't be too worried about splitting the party. If they do, then they create their own adventure: while one of them is guarding the ship, a local gang of pirates tries to steal the ship. Or perhaps a wandering datapad salesman comes knocking on the door. Or an old flame, friend, or foe turns up on this world after seeing the PC's ship or hearing about the PC's friends being in town.

Basically, let your PCs do what they wanna do. It could even be a comedic situation, where you run a split scene in which the rest of the party is getting waste-deep in all kinds of trouble and the PC that stayed with the ship is bored looking for a holo-vid, or scrounging around the galley looking for something specific, or trying to toss and catch nerf jerky in his mouth (Coordination check for effect), or seeing how far up his nose he can stick a hydrospanner handle. Be sure to "switch the scene" at the most critical/tense moments and have the single PC doing something completely ridiculous.

I have always been afraid of splitting the party, but with this game I'm trying to handle it with simultaneous action. It's more work, but if you can alternate the action scenes it can work well. Ideally if you set it up right all the players will be invested in the results of either group...the "away" players should worry that the guards might not keep their ship or location, while the guards might worry that the others won't get back in time to help them.

So...

Just because their ship is hidden doesn't mean the customs agent or his minions can't find it. Or maybe they landed in the middle of a well-hiked nature trail, some family reunion is happening that brings 20+ people up the trail who don't appreciate the intrusion. Or maybe by sheer bad luck this spot is used regularly by a different group of smugglers who will resent the increased exposure. Or...here comes a prospector leading his mechani-mule. Or, canyons are caused by erosion, and here that erosion is caused by terrible flash floods...and it's been raining up in the mountains.

I don't mind my group splitting up to do different things, but this is the worst kind of split-up: the kind where one character stays behind to do absolutely nothing while the rest go have an adventure.

I suggest handling it in a slightly "meta" manner. Tell the player right up front that if he chooses to stay behind at the ship he might be in for a boring session. If he wants to do it anyway, that's his choice. Of course, in that case it would be great if you could come up with some scenarios like people have suggested here to keep him busy so he can have some fun too. But that's entirely optional and only if it doesn't cause too much hassle for you, the GM. Once you've given a player a straight-up warning what he's letting himself in for it's no longer your responsibililty to scramble to entertain him.

Oh, and as for shooting customs officials and blasting ships out of the skies over populated areas? That smacks of some decent (10+) Obligation: Criminal to divide between the characters responsible.

Just think how hard it was for Lucas to run the final encounter of Jedi; the party was split into 3 groups for that one!

Here's the thing; by leaving someone behind with the ship they are basically guaranteeing that something will have happen out there. If neither you or the players want to have to worry about the ship at all just have them make some rolls to work on camoflauging/hiding the ship, then lock it up tight; then the game can move on to what everyone wants to be doing.

Or, if it is that important to them that someone stays with the ship is there some way the person there could still assist the other group? Maybe slicing local data channels to monitor the activity of the security forces? Or even planting false information that sends security away from them? This person could be acting like the combination 'eye in the sky' and getaway driver when things so south and someone has to come blasting in to pick everyone up.

One option is you could have a criminal type hear about the commotion. Not your typical criminal type, but someone with a personal grudge against law enforcement in that town. Maybe his wife was killed in a robbery because the guards were too slow. Maybe his son was a guard killed in action and he's blaming the guards as a whole. There are all sorts of reasons to make any type of NPC that you need have a personal vendetta against the guards in question - or even just that one customs agent.

So, he hears about the commotion, decides to help out the "criminals" and he heads out to find them. Then you could have him do the truck finding, or whatever else needs to be done to keep your group together.

The "only" thing you'd have to do is work on whatever weak point your party has that will get them to trust him, or decide they have no choice but to take his help and hope he's not going to turn them in.

I wouldn't be too worried about splitting the party. If they do, then they create their own adventure: while one of them is guarding the ship, a local gang of pirates tries to steal the ship. Or perhaps a wandering datapad salesman comes knocking on the door. Or an old flame, friend, or foe turns up on this world after seeing the PC's ship or hearing about the PC's friends being in town.

Basically, let your PCs do what they wanna do. It could even be a comedic situation, where you run a split scene in which the rest of the party is getting waste-deep in all kinds of trouble and the PC that stayed with the ship is bored looking for a holo-vid, or scrounging around the galley looking for something specific, or trying to toss and catch nerf jerky in his mouth (Coordination check for effect), or seeing how far up his nose he can stick a hydrospanner handle. Be sure to "switch the scene" at the most critical/tense moments and have the single PC doing something completely ridiculous.

This is pretty much exactly what I do, and it works pretty well. Since during action scenes things are pretty segmented anyway, I don't have any problem stopping at the end of a round of combat and saying "meanwhile, Character X is in the cantina, and the Ithorian assassin you were looking for has just arrived. Character X, what do you do?" Give him about the same attention that anybody in combat gets, then switch back.

Totally. Switching between scenes can really build the momentum of a session, especially because sometimes players need the time to think about what they want to do next. Look for lulls in the narrative or in the players' responses, and then switch scenes: "while you think about what to do next, let's get back to Arkhan who was back at the base training some green recruits..."

An astromech would be able to handle something as simple as flying the ship to them in an emergency, if they have and/or can acquire one. Otherwise, create a smaller scene for the one who stays behind -- maybe something tied specifically to his/her Obligation.

So, any suggestions on how I can realistically keep the party together as they try and recover from their colossal bungle?

Is there a reason they have to stay together?

Wait... Splitting the party is bad?? I know I might have to sit and listen for a while but I've thought splitting the party is a Star Wars staple. How else do we get a lightsaber battle in th Emperor's throne room happening simultaneously with a massive space battle all at the same time a team is on the ground fighting Stormtroopers? Or a light saber battle in the bowels of an exotic place while another group attempts a daring escape from the same location? Or a light saber battle in a palace with lots of interesting stuff while another group assaults the bad guy's control center and leaders?

Awayputurwpn has it right! I'm just supporting him with stuff that.. well... supports him!

This is why my groups always seem to pick up a couple droids. It gives us someone who can stay back at the ship and guard it while we're away.

Also, I've found that splitting the party in this game is easier than in other games. For some reason, it seems easier to tailor encounters on the fly so that they aren't too deadly for just a couple of players. In other games, such as D&D, the monsters are designed with an assumption that they'll be fighting a basic party. This makes it hard for a single player to take down a monster. In this game it's easier for any given player to take down any given bad guy (soak and WT can only get so high) so it's easier to balance for a smaller than expected party.

As the GM, just try to keep things in mind for what to do so that someone isn't bored and doing nothing while the rest of the group is playing. I like the idea of a side adventure for the person waiting at the ship. Perhaps they hear noises and have to investigate. Build the tension while the rest of the party does their thing. Flip back and forth a few times. At the end, the noise could be anything from the law, local people in the area, or wildlife. Mynocks chewing on cables or a nexu stalking for a lunch or just some goat playing around and isn't dangerous at all.

Wait... Splitting the party is bad??

Nah, splitting the party isn't bad. Traditionally it's seen as an additional complication to the already complex job of running a game. (From the player's PoV it can also be risky - smaller groups are more vulnerable than larger ones.) Experience eventually mitigates all such concerns.

You could talk to your players about it. Ask them why they want to stay behind. If it's "because I don't want someone stealing my ship" you can give them your word as a GM that nothing bad is going to happen, and that the main adventure is with the rest of the party.

Talk to your players as a GM, see what they want and the reasoning behind their actions and you can't go wrong.

-EF

You could talk to your players about it. Ask them why they want to stay behind. If it's "because I don't want someone stealing my ship" you can give them your word as a GM that nothing bad is going to happen, and that the main adventure is with the rest of the party.

This player excuse makes me cranky. That and "I carry all my equipment everywhere I go because otherwise the GM will steal it"...

I have a similar problem to the OP, and my first response leans one way, but it's really a conundrum for me. We left a BtR session when the just found the main hull of the ship, and that "somebody should stay with the ship" question already came up. Mind you, it's only a couple players, and given their history of playing, I can see why they were afraid. One time I was a player in a campaign one of them GMd, and that's indeed what he would do. We were investigating a troll hole and had tied up the horses nearby, on the way back I casually said to the other player "what are the odds our horses are gone?"...only to see a malicious grin spread over the GM's face...all of which led to a pointless chase and a near TPK and a totally fruitless session which got us no closer to our goal...all of which might have been fine if we didn't play that campaign only twice a year...

Another incident of lore in these guy's RPG experience was in their youth, when the GM at the time told one of the players:

"Your fighter has to take a leak."

"No, he doesn't."

"Yes he does, he has to go right now."

"No, I whizz on the fire, I'm not leaving camp."

"No, you have to leave camp."

"*sigh*, okay fine."

"Good. You hear the wingbeats of something vast, and the last thing you see is the fire-yellow eyes of a huge red dragon."

And that was it, the player had to roll up a new character.

Given that history, I feel I have to wean them. The conundrum is do I step out of the game and assure them I won't steal the ship on them because this is a different style of game and I don't GM with arbitrary actions; or do I let them split up, but then make sure that if they guard the ship, it will actually need guarding, thus reinforcing their paranoia?

I can feel those players' pain, but that's just bad GMing. Stealing a ship/horses/whatever isn't necessarily bad, but it should move the story forward (as whafrog noted). And what happened to the character doing the pee-pee dance was just the GM putting the character on railroad tracks right off a cliff. Characters should always have a choice in their actions.

If I had a group that insisted on leaving someone behind because they didn't want their ship stolen, I'd talk to them and ask why. Tell them I'd only steal their ship if it moved the story forward, and if that didn't satisfy them I'd tell them out-of-character that I won't do that--it's obviously something the players (not the characters) don't want badly enough they're willing to have one of their own sit the session out just to avoid it.

Now, if my players weren't terrified of having their ship stolen but wanted someone staying behind because it was prudent in the situation...I'd flash back and ask the guy sitting behind what he was doing from time to time. And depending, have someone try to steal the ship, or do something else.

What it comes down to is this: is somebody staying behind because they want the story to be about this (somebody trying to steal the ship), or because they DON'T?

That's what should drive your actions as the GM. If they want the story to include someone trying to steal the ship, give it to them. But if they (as players) are terrified of it and don't want to see it happen, talk about it out-of-character and come to a resolution where nobody has to effectively sit out the session.

The conundrum is do I step out of the game and assure them I won't steal the ship on them because this is a different style of game and I don't GM with arbitrary actions...

Yes.

I have no idea where this "META IS BAD!!!111!!!" nonsense came from, but it's just terrible. The group needs to either be able to trust one another, or it's a purely antagonistic experience.

Let the PCs know they can trust you not to screw them over.

Does this mean at some point they return to find a couple of bandits trying to break in to the ship? Maybe. But it's the trying part that matters. And once the PCs trust you, you can start having "bad stuff" happen. They'll trust that they have a way out or around it.

If I had a nickel for every time a player was turned off to RPGs because of stupid decisions on the part of bad GMs, I could hire someone to whack all the bad GMs in the world.

Agreed. With trust between the players and GM, you can actually do bad things to them--steal their ship, kidnap their mother, put them in a deathtrap--and the players will light up instead of shut down. Because they know the awesome is starting.

…

Given that history, I feel I have to wean them. The conundrum is do I step out of the game and assure them I won't steal the ship on them because this is a different style of game and I don't GM with arbitrary actions; or do I let them split up, but then make sure that if they guard the ship, it will actually need guarding, thus reinforcing their paranoia?

Yesm, you step out of game and discuss it. Otherwise you never get on the same page. Set player expectations immediately when a clash of style occurs.

PLAYER 1: Someone must stay with the ship, I guess it's me this time.

GM: Why must someone stay with the ship?

PLAYER 2: Otherwise you'll have a rabid kryate dragon maul the ship to death. We need someome to fly it out when that happens.

GM: Wait a minute, that's not how I run games. If someone stays back I'll have something happen so their player won't get bored. Otherwise nothing will happen to your ship. I'm telling you as your friend, not your GM. I won't do anything to your ship that you wouldn't be able to prevent unless we agree on it.

PLAYER 3: …

PLAYERS 1 & 2: Wait, you're actually a nice person?!?!?!?!?!?!?

* * *

It's amazing how deep ingrained the paranoia is for some players. You might even have to have the exact same conversation multiple times before it sinks in.

-EF

Hirelings and droids fix the issue of someone needing to watch the stuff. If a group is so worried their stuff will be stolen they should invest in someone/something to watch it.

My group plays that it's pretty hard to break into a ship. We park the thing and just don't worry about someone breaking in and stealing our stuff because only a super skilled thief could do it. Although, we are paranoid about people putting tracking devices on the ship and we scan for those every chance we get. I guess we've been followed more times than we've had stuff stolen.

The conundrum is do I step out of the game and assure them I won't steal the ship on them because this is a different style of game and I don't GM with arbitrary actions...

Yes.

I have no idea where this "META IS BAD!!!111!!!" nonsense came from, but it's just terrible. The group needs to either be able to trust one another, or it's a purely antagonistic experience.

Let the PCs know they can trust you not to screw them over.

Does this mean at some point they return to find a couple of bandits trying to break in to the ship? Maybe. But it's the trying part that matters. And once the PCs trust you, you can start having "bad stuff" happen. They'll trust that they have a way out or around it.

Or what the donkey said

-EF

This thread reminds me of an Angry Rant I read last week: http://www.madadventurers.com/angry-rants-gotcha/