TLDR version : I need a few ideas to give an individual character (not party) some credits.

Full version :

I have 3 players. Call them A, B, and C. We are only 4 sessions into this campaign and the group was to get their first big reward by finding a stash of credits while searching their newly “acquired” ship.

The issue is that Player A found the credits while players B and C were searching the rest of the ship, and since no one was around, Player A took all the money and pocketed it for themselves. In character they have no intention of telling players B and C. Out of game, with table talk Player A apologized right away to Player B and C saying they are sorry but feel that that is what their character would do. To paraphrase, their character “doesn't really know them, and has their own motivations to worry about”. (Even though they all have a mandatory obligation to the same Hutt, */sigh*) Player A has expressed that this primary motivation is get the $ to upgrade their slug thrower with 1 HP to superior quality.

The session played out and now Players B and C are flat broke. Having to spend every last dime they had to heal in medical facility (Player C paid for Player B's care) and to purchase parts to finish building a group purchased medical droid companion. Player A did not offer to contribute to either, citing their character was focusing on their own goal. Though Player A did contribute a measly 25c to a group purchase of updated Hyperspace route coordinates.

I should note that I am not intentionally “keeping them hungry”.

Seeing this fairly selfish hoarding I mentioned that for a highly sought valuable item, taking on some obligation would be the best way to get an item you really want. Unfortunately with all their newly acquired credits Player A is almost close enough with the $ they have so they didn't see the need. And is content to just wait till they get the rest.

I have concerns about “loner” characters and their potential negative impact they can have on a party long-term, but sometimes Players can successfully role-play gaining Trust, so for now I will withhold judgment to see if they play it out that way.

However I would appreciate some advice on how to temporarily alleviate the immediate credit problem for Player's B and C, as both essentially have zero credits to their name now, and Player A has given no indication they intend to share/help until they get their superior weapon upgrade. I don't want Players B and C to feel like the are getting screwed so I was trying to think of a way to get them a few credits directly.

The ideas I have come up with so far.

1. Player B is a scoundrel, so I thought they could win a few hands of gambling

2. Player C is a mechanic, so I thought they could fix up a broken machine/droid for a fee.

Players B and C will surely be surprised at the wealth pouring from A's pockets, when the Hutt shakes them down for the money they owe. Such delinquency, in repaying the magnanimous Hutt, will certainly incur greater obligation.

I guess for the future what you could also do is to make future large gains things that are hard to monopolise, such as payment for services, large items, etc, and make smaller value gains things that can be hidden from others.

3 hours ago, Darzil said:

I guess for the future what you could also do is to make future large gains things that are hard to monopolise, such as payment for services, large items, etc, and make smaller value gains things that can be hidden from others.

Now that I am aware of the potential I will certainly be presenting large rewards in ways that cannot be hidden, but I was simply caught off guard as I never expected this player to take it all.

16 hours ago, ThreeAM said:

Out of game, with table talk Player A apologized right away to Player B and C saying they are sorry but feel that that is what their character would do.

And how did B and C react to said apology? More generally speaking, how do B and C seem to be reacting in general? Do they seem cool with it? Have their been complaints? Does it appear to be impacting their enjoyment of the game?

1 hour ago, Vorzakk said:

And how did B and C react to said apology? More generally speaking, how do B and C seem to be reacting in general? Do they seem cool with it? Have their been complaints? Does it appear to be impacting their enjoyment of the game?

If I remember correctly when we were at the table their response was simply shrugs. I spoke to both B and C privately and they say its not a problem. Claiming that in character they no nothing about it so they aren't bothered.

However, when Player C had to help B pay for their medical care, and then buy the droid parts themselves without anyone else chipping in, player C did remark to the group "Well I ' did' have a small cushion of credits, but now I'm broke". And Player A then remarked, "Oh I thought that droid was for you", but then made no attempts to chip in.

Additionally, Both before and after this session Player B has complained repeatedly about "always getting downed" to which they want to acquire Armored clothing, stimpacks, and a medical droid companion, which of course all cost credits. Instead Player B seems to be expressing frustration with the system, and I know for a fact Player B is not enjoying the game when they get knocked unconscious (has happened twice in the first 4 sessions) while Player A gets to waste 5 minions solo. I am aware that slightly better armor/healing won't necessarily fix all their problems, but at least Player B won't feel as helpless.

Ultimately if all the players had some surplus credits I doubt anyone would care, but since they essentially now have nothing I think it has a much bigger impact.

To be honest it won't be long before the characters notice that character A has a lot more capital then the other two and will demand to know where he got it. I would encourage this wedge by forwarding the bill to the parties address or some other signs.

this does sound like a deeply uncompassionate arsehole of a character. Which is fine if that is precisely what he is looking for, just if scum betrays scum, the breach in trust can be huge.

Would recommend having the "how do the players feel about player vs player action" conversation with them soon. This sort of thing can quickly devolve into that, and if some players like it and others don't can implode a group. What is good for the players should trump what is good for the characters, as we don't play games for the benefit of the characters.

I would be inclined to trigger the Hutt obligation, maybe have the hutts henchmen track down the group and demand a large payment to let them go on thier way, otherwise they will report back and the Hutt will want a 'conversation' with the group. This payment could then reduce the group obligation.

Also, get the player in question to watch this

5 hours ago, lupex said:

I would be inclined to trigger the Hutt obligation, maybe have the hutts henchmen track down the group and demand a large payment to let them go on thier way, otherwise they will report back and the Hutt will want a 'conversation' with the group. This payment could then reduce the group obligation.

Also, get the player in question to watch this

Definitely a good suggestion, but unfortunately the Obligation is Bounty, so they are already wanted by the Hutt ; and I already have the Bounty Hunters ambush geared up for the net session anyway. Perhaps I'll have the BH's ask for a bribe first...but knowing this player is an assassin, they'll prob just start shooting rather than pay.

Thanks for the video link. We'll see shortly if this behave continues or they are just role-playing it for the start. If not i'll have them watch the video.

On 8/5/2017 at 8:29 PM, ThreeAM said:

If I remember correctly when we were at the table their response was simply shrugs. I spoke to both B and C privately and they say its not a problem. Claiming that in character they no nothing about it so they aren't bothered.

However, when Player C had to help B pay for their medical care, and then buy the droid parts themselves without anyone else chipping in, player C did remark to the group "Well I ' did' have a small cushion of credits, but now I'm broke". And Player A then remarked, "Oh I thought that droid was for you", but then made no attempts to chip in.

Additionally, Both before and after this session Player B has complained repeatedly about "always getting downed" to which they want to acquire Armored clothing, stimpacks, and a medical droid companion, which of course all cost credits. Instead Player B seems to be expressing frustration with the system, and I know for a fact Player B is not enjoying the game when they get knocked unconscious (has happened twice in the first 4 sessions) while Player A gets to waste 5 minions solo. I am aware that slightly better armor/healing won't necessarily fix all their problems, but at least Player B won't feel as helpless.

Ultimately if all the players had some surplus credits I doubt anyone would care, but since they essentially now have nothing I think it has a much bigger impact.

Sounds to me like the only problem you have is that you need to shoot at B less and A more.

If B and C arent complaining about A's actions then it isnt really a problem. Sounds to me more like you should just give them another job to do to earn some money.

21 minutes ago, korjik said:

Sounds to me like the only problem you have is that you need to shoot at B less and A more.

Haha, no argument here I will definitely be doing this.

I have played a character that had interests that ran counter to the group before. The key thing is absolute transparency away from game. Make sure that all the players are okay with this and that there's no bad blood festering below the surface. Once you get the player buy-in, then you can start to have fun with the story arc. If everyone is onboard, I see no problems here.

I played a traitor in a group for four years. The amount of satisfaction I got as each week passed without discovery was astounding. Each week I deliberately let something small drop to give my character away. Every player, at some point during the campaign, accused me but I managed to bluff my way out and even managed to set other party members against each other. In the finale the character died, and I was given a good hiding. It was all good fun filling in the rest of the group about my evil deeds. We all had fun. It must be mentioned that I have been playing with some members for over thirty years. It all depends on how well the players get on.

Remind your players they are using imaginary characters to fly imaginary spacecraft around an imaginary universe. It does not matter if a character gets blown up each week, or if he has no credits in his pocket. What matters is having a good evening with friends.

Hey ThreeAm,

All around, I think you've got a good grasp on the situation and it sounds like (for the most part) the players are going to be okay with this situation. Obviously there will be some strain in the future.

"Bob! Help! I'm wounded! Do you have a stimpak I can have?"

"Oh my, Alvin! That is a nasty looking wound, but unfortunately, I'm saving this stimpak for when I might need it."

"But . . <sputter> Bob? Charley?"

"Sorry, Alvin. Remember when I needed medical help and only Bob helped? Even though you had plenty of credits to do so? Yeah? Sorry, 'friend' but you're on your own on this one . . ."

So there's Karmic justice to be had . . .

And from a counter point, just because you have money doesn't obligate you to help someone else who needs money. (Or any other resource for that matter).

If individual PC's have opportunity to earn money individually, they have every right to keep it.

And lastly, our group has a tool that I call the "Ship's Purse." (which could also be called a Company Purse). In short, its a pile of money that is used for the group. And group income is put into that pile of money. And occasionally, the PC's should take equal shares out as draws in form of a salary or payment.

I don't know if anyone else does it this way, but my current group appears to be working well with this.

As an aside, the other, older campaign saw members steal from the ship's purse. The Players were well aware of the larceny (and some of it was encouraged) so the Players were okay. However, Karmic justice may rear its head yet . . .

Thanks for the feedback Mark. I tend to agree with you about not being obligated to help others who need money; especially when someone wants some fancy new gear. However when it comes to keeping your teammates alive I feel like that there is an easy argument to make, that keeping your teammates alive is essentially the same thing as self preservation, since your team is there also keeping you alive (by soaking up those blaster shots instead of you ).

For Karmic justice: I know my players very well and this scenario is very unlikely to play out, ie Players B and C dealing out the justice. As the GM it will likely fall on me do deal out the Justice because I control the justice, I control karma, I control fate! I CONTROL EVERYTHING!! ... oops, got carried away there for a sec. However, my players are pretty good about not metagmaing, but they find ways to have their PC's figure stuff out.

3 hours ago, Mark Caliber said:

As an aside, the other, older campaign saw members steal from the ship's purse. The Players were well aware of the larceny (and some of it was encouraged) so the Players were okay. However, Karmic justice may rear its head yet . . .

Before the "indecent", I actually considered suggesting this idea of a common pool for shared expenses. However just as you described it would most certainly be plundered. So it's probably best not to intentionally set up specific instances that promote theft

On 7.8.2017 at 3:54 AM, ThreeAM said:

Definitely a good suggestion, but unfortunately the Obligation is Bounty, so they are already wanted by the Hutt ; and I already have the Bounty Hunters ambush geared up for the net session anyway. Perhaps I'll have the BH's ask for a bribe first...but knowing this player is an assassin, they'll prob just start shooting rather than pay.

Didn't Han Solo have a bounty in New Hope, but Jabba still allowed him one change to redeem himself (after Solo killed Greedo)? If reason for bounty is that PCs owe money to Hutt, it would be very logical that Hutt would rather take its money than kill PCs. At least until PCs disappoint Hutt few times, and make the Hutt mad. IMO, if Hutt's stake is money, he's willing to negotiate, if it's honor, then he's not.

On 18.8.2017 at 7:27 PM, Mark Caliber said:

And lastly, our group has a tool that I call the "Ship's Purse." (which could also be called a Company Purse). In short, its a pile of money that is used for the group. And group income is put into that pile of money. And occasionally, the PC's should take equal shares out as draws in form of a salary or payment.

We use this style in almost all our games.

On 2017-08-05 at 2:56 AM, ThreeAM said:

1. Player B is a scoundrel, so I thought they could win a few hands of gambling

2. Player C is a mechanic, so I thought they could fix up a broken machine/droid for a fee.

Those are good solutions, that's what I would do. These kinds of things don't have to be a sidebar, they can still be part of whatever mission is going on, e.g. "we need a speeder, how about I fix one for this guy I know and he'll pay me a bit and give us a loaner for a day so we can ...".

If Player A is always rationalizing that kind of behaviour, I would say they aren't really playing their character, that's just who they are and I would have a hard time not giving jobs and "found cash" to B and C until the situation is equalized. But if it's a one-off, then maybe it's reasonable.

On 8/18/2017 at 3:33 PM, ThreeAM said:

Thanks for the feedback Mark. I tend to agree with you about not being obligated to help others who need money; especially when someone wants some fancy new gear. However when it comes to keeping your teammates alive I feel like that there is an easy argument to make, that keeping your teammates alive is essentially the same thing as self preservation, since your team is there also keeping you alive (by soaking up those blaster shots instead of you ).

For Karmic justice: I know my players very well and this scenario is very unlikely to play out, ie Players B and C dealing out the justice. As the GM it will likely fall on me do deal out the Justice because I control the justice, I control karma, I control fate! I CONTROL EVERYTHING!! ... oops, got carried away there for a sec. However, my players are pretty good about not metagmaing, but they find ways to have their PC's figure stuff out.

Before the "indecent", I actually considered suggesting this idea of a common pool for shared expenses. However just as you described it would most certainly be plundered. So it's probably best not to intentionally set up specific instances that promote theft

It isnt actually the GMs job to deal out 'karmic justice' when it is between the PCs. That is what the RP in RPG is for. It is something for the players to deal with on their own. If B and C arent willing to keep from being ripped off, that isnt the GMs problem, but theirs.

18 hours ago, kkuja said:

Didn't Han Solo have a bounty in New Hope, but Jabba still allowed him one change to redeem himself (after Solo killed Greedo)? If reason for bounty is that PCs owe money to Hutt, it would be very logical that Hutt would rather take its money than kill PCs. At least until PCs disappoint Hutt few times, and make the Hutt mad. IMO, if Hutt's stake is money, he's willing to negotiate, if it's honor, then he's not.

We use this style in almost all our games.

That's true and normally a good suggestion. However, specifically in this case it's Teemo the Hutt in the Beginner adventure, so I'm not really planning a long patron setup there . But they will definitely be needing to "redeem themselves" to the Next Hutt for the inevitable elimination of Teemo. (killing a Hutt never goes unpunished you know )

13 hours ago, whafrog said:

Those are good solutions, that's what I would do. These kinds of things don't have to be a sidebar, they can still be part of whatever mission is going on, e.g. "we need a speeder, how about I fix one for this guy I know and he'll pay me a bit and give us a loaner for a day so we can ...".

If Player A is always rationalizing that kind of behaviour, I would say they aren't really playing their character, that's just who they are and I would have a hard time not giving jobs and "found cash" to B and C until the situation is equalized. But if it's a one-off, then maybe it's reasonable.

Yep worked out nearly perfectly as Player C has "Utinni" so I made sure to throw some scrap-able stuff their way, and Player B won some hands of gambling to piss off the Bad guys to start the cantina brawl they were supposed to fight anyway. Hopefully it wont become a reoccurring problem.

4 hours ago, korjik said:

It isnt actually the GMs job to deal out 'karmic justice' when it is between the PCs. That is what the RP in RPG is for. It is something for the players to deal with on their own. If B and C arent willing to keep from being ripped off, that isnt the GMs problem, but theirs.

I hadn't really planned to do anything in-game, I was kinda just joking around when I said I control everything.

On 22.8.2017 at 7:11 AM, ThreeAM said:

That's true and normally a good suggestion. However, specifically in this case it's Teemo the Hutt in the Beginner adventure, so I'm not really planning a long patron setup there . But they will definitely be needing to "redeem themselves" to the Next Hutt for the inevitable elimination of Teemo. (killing a Hutt never goes unpunished you know )

In a shorter games I tend to be quite a liberal with giving credits to PCs. That tends to make games feel more high powered.

But more back to first post. If player A wants just to hoard money for personal gain, put players B and C through additional things and activities which they have to do because they don't have money. AND make sure those activities are fun for players. Don't deny player A the enjoyment, just make sure everyone knows that those side adventures are encountered thanks to PCs B and C not having money. That way you may teach player A that hoarding doesn't increase fun and time in spotlight.

About giving money. Arrange situation where player B and/or C are doing something together, and they e.g. encounter a wealthy noble, being robbed by someone. When/if PCs save the noble, he will demand that he pays PCs because they saved him. Later he may be valuable contact, worth more than money.