I cringe every time I hear a PC say, "I'll wait here." or basically anything that will separate them from the rest of the group of PCs. Even though, it might seem like a smart thing to do in game at the time in their minds, it means that they will sit there for an hour twiddling their thumbs while the other people play the game.

Sure, as a GM I can try railroading them along with there friends, but it seems really apparent that I'm trying to do that (my fault as a GM). I'm thinking about telling them out of game before every session to try not to separate unless I hint to them that it might be beneficial to do so.

Its a common theme here and there are several threads with similar discussions. Quick search for the recent ones I remember

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/268411-players-who-arent-involved/

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/264372-pcs-ship-gms-pain/

The person that stays behind doesn't have to have a boring time, but the onus of running two scenes and encounters could weigh heavily on the GM.

1 hour ago, Darth Poopdeck said:

I cringe every time I hear a PC say, "I'll wait here." or basically anything that will separate them from the rest of the group of PCs. Even though, it might seem like a smart thing to do in game at the time in their minds, it means that they will sit there for an hour twiddling their thumbs while the other people play the game.

As noted in the links ThreeAM provided, I used to have a problem with this, but have found that splitting the party in this system is quite easy to do. Treat it like Act 3 of any of the movies, where the action switches from one group to the other no matter where the groups are relative to each other. You can resolve one turn for one group before switching to the next group, and the net effect is everybody is as busy as they would have been if they were all together.

So the main reason to do it is that it's easier that it might seem. But another reason is so that the players learn that no matter what they do, they will be busy. This might actually discourage them from splitting up in the future...

1 minute ago, themensch said:

...but the onus of running two scenes and encounters could weigh heavily on the GM.

It's not double the weight...more like 10%. Especially if you have handy tools like initiative grids, the adversary decks, and inspiration joggers like Rory's Story Cubes.

A PC says "I'll stay behind and guard the entrance to the alley." Fine. Move on with the other PCs for a bit, then: "There's a kid walking towards you, a little street rat, picking his nose. 'Hey mister, whatcha doin'?', he says." Now you have an encounter which, depending on how it's handled, can provide useful information to the rest of the team, or bring out the kid's older siblings or parents to see why he's crying. And you can easily weave this activity with that of the other party.

20 minutes ago, whafrog said:

It's not double the weight...more like 10%. Especially if you have handy tools like initiative grids, the adversary decks, and inspiration joggers like Rory's Story Cubes.

A PC says "I'll stay behind and guard the entrance to the alley." Fine. Move on with the other PCs for a bit, then: "There's a kid walking towards you, a little street rat, picking his nose. 'Hey mister, whatcha doin'?', he says." Now you have an encounter which, depending on how it's handled, can provide useful information to the rest of the team, or bring out the kid's older siblings or parents to see why he's crying. And you can easily weave this activity with that of the other party.

Those threats the main party rolls? Yeah, that's guards showing up out front to confront the person that stayed behind. The two stories don't have to be unlinked at all!

The issue I see is divided focus, which isn't unique to this game and as long as no one player is sitting too long, adults can kindly sit quietly without messing with their phones while someone else plays.... One can choose to see it as a pile of lemons, or the raw ingredients for lemonade, as you suggest @whafrog !

I love when the party split up, it’s when being gm gets to be it’s most challenging but also most rewarding. For me the best part of a split group is that characters can be themselves, if everyone is together then players always tend towards the most skilled character making each skill check. But when they are apart then they each get to use their other skills; confronting the Scoundrel with a climb whilst the Face has a small group of guards to deal with and the Muscle finds themselves tailing an informant.

I try hard to not hit everyone in the dump stat, but instead pick things relative to their secondary focus with a chance to use their core focus here and there. But the important part to to constantly switch between each player, ensuring that everyone gets equal time in the spotlight.

4 hours ago, Richardbuxton said:

I try hard to not hit everyone in the dump stat, but instead pick things relative to their secondary focus with a chance to use their core focus here and there.

This is important to remember!

Star Trek Adventures introduces (at least I don't know it from other systems) a nice mechanic for this: Support Characters. These are Characters, who aren't as fleshed out as the main characters, but a player can choose to play one when the main character stays separated and has nothing to do (captain stays on the ship during dangerous away misisons, for example).

Let them play a droid, they take with them, or, if they are good roleplayers, let them control the enemy stormtrooper squad during a fight.

If you don't want all this, there are comlinks. So the separated character can at least take part in discussions. Or just give him something to do every now and then. Suddenly an alarm can go off in the cockpit, indicating a problem with the engines.

If they insist that one player has to stay back and guard the ship, give them a reason, why it was a good idea. The obvious: An adversary can show up and try to sabotage/hack into/steal the ship.
The dockmaster can show up, to discuss some things. Maybe the ship has to move to another docking pad, to make space for a larger ship. Maybe some workers show up to pump in expensive fuel, restock the food supplies or do other services to push up the docking fee.

Personally, my group just has an understanding that if a guard is going to show up, there will be an out. I personally don't just always look to screw them over if they leave their ship somewhere unless I need something to happen for plot. IE, a rival sets a tracker on their ship while its unattended because I need that rival to show up later, or they get pinned because the door was left open because I need to heighten the stakes.

At the end of the day, we all just agree that it's a game, and we're willing to sacrifice a small amount of immersion for the sake of everyone getting to participate in the game so they don't have to draw straws to pick who has to guard the ship.

14 hours ago, evo454 said:

Personally, my group just has an understanding that if a guard is going to show up, there will be an out. I personally don't just always look to screw them over if they leave their ship somewhere unless I need something to happen for plot. IE, a rival sets a tracker on their ship while its unattended because I need that rival to show up later, or they get pinned because the door was left open because I need to heighten the stakes.

At the end of the day, we all just agree that it's a game, and we're willing to sacrifice a small amount of immersion for the sake of everyone getting to participate in the game so they don't have to draw straws to pick who has to guard the ship.

I didn' meat to do something to their ship while no one is there, I meant: If they are so paranoid, that they always leave one character there to guard, then let someone show up or let something happen.

3 hours ago, MasterZelgadis said:

I didn' meat to do something to their ship while no one is there, I meant: If they are so paranoid, that they always leave one character there to guard, then let someone show up or let something happen.

If you want to play into that paranoia, then yes, that works totally fine. It gives the character left behind something to do.

That's just how my group decided to do it so that one person doesn't have to stay behind and we don't have to keep having "meanwhile back at farm" moments. Everyone in my group is just as paranoid, but they also want to jump into the fray and get the job done, so we just kind of agree that unless I'm hinting at it, nothing of significance will happen. Plus I try to provide them with an NPC or two to offer "protection fees" at shifty docks so that they feel safer and still have to compromise with a more realistic criminal underworld.

Absolutely, it's a decision between:

- it is ok that someone stays behind: reward them for that planning
and
- it is not ok, that someone stays behind: show them, that it is not necessary

You should decide early which way you go, if 5 times nothing happens during guard, the 6th time no guard stays back.. the worst that could happen is that exactly then someone shows up and steals their ship

6 hours ago, evo454 said:

If you want to play into that paranoia, then yes, that works totally fine. It gives the character left behind something to do.

I don't consider it playing into their paranoia, nor is it a kind of punishment others seem to want to inflict. It's just I've come to the conclusion that no matter what they do, everybody will be involved in something. I figure that's my responsibility as the GM, to keep the table entertained.

One other item to make the job easier (in addition to the adversary decks etc mentioned above) is that the standard SW trope is that comlinks almost always work, with a few exceptions for plot reasons. Nobody buys a comlink, they just have them. So if it makes your job easier to keep all the PCs in contact just hand wave it (or flip a DP on their behalf).

This game is easy enough to run by the seat of one's pants, splitting the party really shouldn't be a problem to deal with. But in order to discover this I had to actually try it out, as in all previous games it's been considered an anathema. It took a couple failures to get the right rhythm, and some back and forth with the players about how to improve it. But now I'd say it generally goes pretty well...or at least they don't seem to hesitate splitting the party when it's clearly the best course of action.

In short, give it a shot. Be up front with your players about what you're doing, and ask for improvement suggestions after the session. Players can't ask for much more than that.

6 hours ago, evo454 said:

Plus I try to provide them with an NPC or two to offer "protection fees" at shifty docks so that they feel safer and still have to compromise with a more realistic criminal underworld.

I did this at 1 or 2 of the first ports my players went to. "Jim the docking attendant asks for registration...sees ship is stolen, looks at them sideways, hints at small bribe, 10 credits, then tells then he'll take good care of her". Nothing happened and they caught on. I straight up told them that if I want to take your ship/stuff i'll make it happen because I am the GM and no amount of planning will stop it, but if I do it will always be for a story/plot reason, and not something done as a punishment for lack of planning on their part.

Playing it safe and expecting them to take every perceivable precaution is boring. If they make even a smidgen of effort that's enough for me. On the other hand if they are never planning ahead for anything and blinding stumbling into everything that is a different case, in which they should absolutely suffer consequences.

1 hour ago, whafrog said:

It's just I've come to the conclusion that no matter what they do, everybody will be involved in something. I figure that's my responsibility as the GM, to keep the table entertained.

That's exactly what I wanted to say

The player that stays behind... their obligation turns up - no roll, no prep, just MIUAYGA,,, Instellar Collections Ltd arrives to impound the ship, a debt collector arrives, an ISB agent turns up arrests them with regards to their current actions, a bounty hunter turns up, a shipjacker turns up, a pirate crew turns up trying to steal the ship etc etc. Raise the difficulty due to stress on not having the team back up, give them strain etc Keep this up until they get the hint that staying behind is not an option

OR

The player that stays behind... and does nothing.... therefore NO XP

Sometimes I get the distinct impression that 'player only' RPers haven't got a clue how much work goes into rp'ing when it comes to prep etc. I'm at the point where I can MIUAIGA and with SW with all the minions, rivals and nemesis etc..

On 4/6/2018 at 2:59 PM, Darth Poopdeck said:

I cringe every time I hear a PC say, "I'll wait here." or basically anything that will separate them from the rest of the group of PCs. Even though, it might seem like a smart thing to do in game at the time in their minds, it means that they will sit there for an hour twiddling their thumbs while the other people play the game.

Sure, as a GM I can try railroading them along with there friends, but it seems really apparent that I'm trying to do that (my fault as a GM). I'm thinking about telling them out of game before every session to try not to separate unless I hint to them that it might be beneficial to do so.

Why does that particular player choose to do that? Is he a coward or is the table being presented with challenges that he can't meaningfully contribute to?

EDIT: 100% of role-playing games work around group agreements for player behavior. It's completely within your rights as a GM to ask every player to go along with the party but it's also the player's right to tell the GM that he feels that his character is severely at-risk or has nothing to do with the encounters that have been scripted.

Aye, thing is generally a good agreement to leave the vessels alone unless the party have been shaking up some major players lately. That way there is no need to assign anyone to "protect the ship", usually if you pay docking fees then ships are usually kept really save unless the party is committing loud and proud acts of terrorism, and even then that should only make the inevitable escape that bit more exciting.

This is different from splitting the party; where only certain party members attend certain functions while others do something else; this is willingly agreeing to be inactive and set aside additional time for the lone man on the ship. Don't get me wrong it adds a certain amount of humanity to the story by having characters seek leisure and not necessarily eyeing up the next job, but the important thing is that characters should be immersed in their activities; the average smuggler probably spends most days on his vessel, so doing the same once they reach port is such a situation where setback dice for "every day blending together" can be had. So even if some character's aren't chasing up the next job/ a particular role, they can still be doing something. Making a little money on the side, buying that thing they always wanted or making a connection with this local port to see what makes people tick. My Rodian for example actively avoids going back to his ship while there's something else he could be doing because he rarely gets any time off; any reports he would hand in would likely be passed down a com call.

Some sessions, especially heavily narrative driven ones might sometimes exclude players for a period of time; in empire strikes back Luke spends most of his time separated from his friends in order to make a journey of his own. Episode 4 Leia is effectively isolated until the other players saved her; and played down her captivity by immediately taking charge of the situation.

The take away message is don't force the players to stick together, but do encourage that they all have something they can be doing , that way it makes your job easier to keep them hooked, aside from that "oh, someone approches your hanger". Don't cater to that if their ship is secure, just state point blank that the adventure isn't going to necessary come to them; they must make an effort to seek it out.

My players would NOT stick together last night.

The whole session was run similar to how most TV shows handle A & B plot lines. And I chose to run it like that with the action focused on one group and once that was resolved, I'd move to the next group, going back and forth like that most of the session.

There were a couple of things working in our favor. I had dropped the players into a sandbox with a single mission profile and very limited contacts and outside resources. I really wanted to see how the players (& their characters) would tackle this mission.

It turned out that the group decided to cover more ground by splitting into two teams that worked concurrently. No one got shot (which was unusual) but there was a street level fist fight. And with the characters keeping a quiet combat free profile (this time) we didn't have to worry about them being outnumbered and overwhelmed in combat.

I found that following the PC's leads and using the dice to help shape the narrative helped a lot.

Both groups had commlinks and used them liberally to coordinate their efforts, which I thought was very cool.

So I think we can chalk that up to a success? Everyone seemed to have fun overall, but half of the group was audience for about half of the session.

There's a difference between splitting the party so that two objectives can be achieved in an adventure and someone relegating themselves to "guard duty." If the PCs have a reasonable suspicion that, say, someone has messed with their ship, have them roll a Vigilance test.

Not in my campaign, but I was a player in another campaign, and as a player I felt kinda forced at times to have my character do things that prevented them from really interacting in certain situations because of the backstory that I crafted. The GM failed to warn me that in the campaign we would essentially be working for the very same Hutt that my character's backstory had him trying to escape from. In that case there really wasn't anything either of us could do (even though I did try to get some interaction in) I would have a talk with the player and ask them what about their character inspires the idea of staying behind well the rest of the party goes off to do this or that, and work out a way to craft the story into allowing the character to join them without fear of causing a massive scene everywhere they went due to his backstory

This is Star Wars, in every movie, show, book, comic, bed time story (ok,maybe I made that one up), the party splits up. This was pointed out by one of my players just as they separated last week. Unfortunately for them, the smaller group ram into the Sith Lord I intentionally created to fight 8 players. Needless to say, comlinks were activated and the party soon rejoined each other.

I actually don't have a problem with the players splitting. When not in combat situation, I focus on each team for one or two actions and just bounce between them. One of my favorite Mutants and Mastermind's game had the party split into three teams all searching separate information on the main investigation.

For players who have their characters stay behind, it's important to understand why.

In my game, one of our players has strong spectator tendencies, and was a piloting droid, so he'd often stay behind on the ship. It made sense in-character, since he was protective of the ship, and I didn't want to constantly put the spotlight on a player who tended to shy away from it. I saw no harm in letting him get group experience, since he had a mechanically important role, and produced occasional moments of comedy gold when he'd snark off in-character. He was there to hang out with friends and watch us have fun, and I was fine with that. Players like that generally don't mind twiddling their thumbs as long as the rest of the group is having fun.

But if the player in question isn't a spectator, you need to figure out their motives. Some thoughts:

OOC Paranoia: Some players have had vicious GMs who'd give players trouble if they didn't put a PC on guard duty or the like. If you want them to participate with the group, let them know you're not going to do that sort of thing.

IC Paranoia: Star Wars has a lot of hives of scum and villainy beyond Mos Eisley, so let their paranoia pay off on occasion where they get to use their preparation and best skills for the group's benefit.

"I can't contribute" : You might need to give the player clear utility in whatever the group's doing, so they'll participate. Take a good look at what they can do and come up with ways to make their skills relevant.

"This sounds boring, so I'll just stay behind." : That's a bigger problem, needing a deep discussion with what the player wants out of the game.

Of course, this is assuming you want the PC in question to stay with the party. If they're splitting off for good reasons, give them something to do, even if it's just dialogue with a passing NPC. And I imagine there are a lot of ways to make interesting encounters out of needing to quickly rejoin the group when they get in trouble. I had a non-combat character stand by with a swoop to act as an ambulance, for example.

I usually stay behind if it's a story element that doesn't apply to my character, but I have no problem watching the others in their story for extended periods of time and I feel entertained. I would rather sit out than be included just because.