[Raellus]

Thanks fusilier.

To answer your question, KC, I kind of did railroad the group. In my defense, the established RESET game thread/side-plot in my campaign called for a major obstacle at this point in the game. I felt it would be unrealistic to dispense with this and simply throw another platoon of garrison troops at them. The tug has chewed up everything I've thrown at it so far, including an Mi-17 gunship and a 30mm cannon armed hovercraft.

On the other hand, I had kind of grown tired of the limitations the tug has placed on the game and its players. Since the beginning, I've had player complaints about their PCs being stuck on board the tug whenever groups went ashore. I've been unwilling to man the tug with NPCs (unrealistic and too much work) to solve the problem so this seemed a way to deal with it.

So, in this case, I am guilty of railroading. For the most part, though, I've given the PCs the freedom to go, say, and do as they please. The only times I've stepped in is when the story started to lag and needed to be prodded (or pushed) along a bit and this always after repeated warnings. This is the first and only time so far that I've forced a particular course of action. I hope it's the last.

I don't want to ever end up the kind of GM Tigger mentioned in his post.

As for players being emotionally invested in the tug, I hope that is the case- at least a little but. However, no one has ever expressed any kind of attachment to the tug, either IC or OOC. I think it's more of a comfort object for some and- to be a bit harsh- and excuse for some players not to post sometimes. This may not be fair, but it's sure seemed this way at times.

So, I've made up my mind and am compelling the party to leave the tug and strike out for Warsaw over land. We'll see what happens.