Whereas Rose has leadership qualities and a sense of professionalism about her. (and in one level even get's followers) Her personal reputation and lack of open disclosure about herself amongst even her own group I doubt would allow them to trust her intimately enough to follow her command. As Aryn said she's a bit too flighty and interested in personal agendas behind the scenes at times to be a valued leader for our party.

Ok I’m in the middle of working on my post and just realized our individual races are not listed. I think we would know who was a Khord or a Syl like me.

Also here is a possible compromise for party leader. I’ll take the job in the out of city/town area’s as I am a Ranger Pathfinder and best suited of the party in the wilds. However we do need someone better suited to take over as leader and negotiator for the party within city walls as Crow sucks inside them overall. I vote for Alana as leader in town as she has already started to bargain on the parties behalf and she was approached first.

I leave this idea up to the other players as no one really seems to want the job.

me be the talker in town.. Half my skill set is on information gathering seduction commerce and what not. plus I have a pretty face and some really strong.... assets (charisma) lol

with alana talking and what not I'm not one to inturrupt her etc.

is up. had fun with it.. good to be playing again

Alana is a frail woman with a lame leg from an affliction similar to polio. Her looks are just good enough to keep people from staring at her too long but certainly not feel comfortable around her. If you wish her to be the leader in town we might be in for a tough road. :-)

I do not like the split leadership idea; it never ends up working well.

Can we have a name for our group?
Something we as a group can use for notoriety and such as we adventure.

Such famous troupe names are..
The Order of the Stick
Acquisitions Incorporated
stuff like that.

More fantasy oriented there's a ton of audalis groups etc.. but let's get some ideas out there.. you know.. every adventureing group (in audalis) should aim for a spot as npc's down the road up in the 'people organization' page

Suggestions:

The Crimson Blades - a Strong name
Unsung Heroes (random individuals who come together in times of need or crisis then go their seperate ways)
Enforcers of Ertain

The Trailblazers - sorta exciting adventuring name etc

And as for 'the talker' I mentioned..
I'm not saying I have to be the leader all I'm saying is I dont mind being the 'face' of the group.. public speaker, the one to strike deals or save coin for us etc etc..

... we don't have a "leader" of the group. I get the sense that none of our characters, exceppt maybe Tek's is really into being "commanded" or "ordered" around anyway.

The key question I think we're going to need to figure out for our characters is why we keep adventuring together despite the fact most of us have "lone wolf" or "free spirited" tendencies? What makes your character "put up with", or, beter yet, enjoy being with our characters?

Now that might be hard to say at the moment because we haven't played our characters together yet. The basic assuption though for the game is that each of our characters have adventured together in the past, that those adventures have met with moderate success, and that they actually trust each other well enough on the road (or in the dungeon, or on the field of battle).

If that's our baseline, then a big part for us as players is having our characters live into that existing storyline.

So, for example, take Kaelyn's post... perhaps this isn't the first time Rose has given Alana some funds for the orphanage. In fact, it's quite possible that Alana, regardless of what she thinks of some of Rose's other characteristics, is able to trust Rose because Alana feels she knows Rose's heart... the rogue cares deeply for the poor.

Or, perhaps, Nadya respects Alana's determination for life as the gypsy woman watches the mage overcome physical difficulties.

Or, perhaps, Rose, while she has trouble with Archan brash and blunt ways, has some respect for the man because he's got some courage and stepped in front of a death blow meant for her once... I don't know... I'm just spit-balling here, but I think you get what I'm saying. Even though we don't have the specific details of our past spelled out yet, the assumption is our characters actually think adventuring together is a good thing and they genuinely like one another.

So, about leadership of the group... maybe our group is similar to the guys in the "Expendables"... they all knew each other well enough to trust that they would perform their roles well when the time came and that they had each other's backs... even though they really didn't know much of each other's personal lives.

How does this play out in our group? Nadya will probably look to Crow when it comes time to move through the woods... the sylvari pathfinder has definitely led them through the woods before and he seems to know what he's doing. Alana seems to have a deep moral compass, which Nadya might now always agree with, but Nadya will likely look to her to determine whther or not a course of action is good or bad. Rose has a way with words and if we ever need to negotiate some contract or defuse a situation with words, Nadya would likely expect Rose to step up.

Anyway... my two cents.
Ayrn

comparison to the expendibles... would be a decent name of a group if not so utterly cliche in hindsight haha.

Companions (or Riders) of the Open Road - expresses the reality that our group is a bit nomadic.

The Winsome Companions (or Blades) - winsome meaning "charming, disarming, engaging, good-natured")

Company (or Companions, or Blades) of the Free (or Open) Hand - expresses perhaps our shared concern for the poor or liberitarian, free spirit)

There's a few!
Ayrn

I sorta like the Company (companions) of the open hand.. makes me imagine some catch phrase about the open hand baring a clenched fist against evil or some other corny line lol.

Kaelyn - Very nice post, glad to see your writing has been inspired.

As for the leader issue, you dont have to have a leader though a spokesperson when you are in town dealing with potential employers might be a good idea. Usually someone with a high charisma, no offense to Alana but she probably isnt the best bet there.

Leaders sometimes tend to be a bad idea, especially when the players & characters all tend to be free spirits. I mean who knows your character's potential better than yourself?

To group names, I like the 'Expendables' Yes, that will do nicely!

So keep the great posts coming, if everyone's is in early I might do my update early, I am already working on some of it now. Once I have everyones posts I will finalize it and get it out to you.

~Aryn


p.s. Races of group

Lambert Vaughn – Human
Maithias Crowmarhte – Sylvari
Archan – Human
Nadya – Human
The Crimson Rose – Human
Alana – Human (I think, it is missing from character sheet. How did I miss that one? )

So looks like the lone Syl is Crow the Pathfinder.

Honestly what Aryn said about being Leader was my intent from the start.

Instead of spending a week or two with each player saying "I'm not the Leader, Well I don't want to be Leader" It was easier for me to say I'll be the Leader and then someone would eventually say do we really need a Leader. Then it would be decided not to really have a Leader but to have a per situation Leader depending on what we find ourselves in and let the best character for the job be the Leader. So in that way we are all the Leader.

Sorry Keeper seems we will have more then one Leader and be better off for it.

I know some of you are saying "Yeah rt Tann is full of BS he really wanted to be leader". Actually no I did not and here's why.

As a Ranger Pathfinder most of the time I'll be 10-30 yards in front of the party
Hmmm kinda hard to be party leader and give orders from that far away. So now that we have that settled lets move on.

Rather than struggle for a leader, why not just settle on a spokesperson? One person to be the face of the group and voice decisions, as opposed to somebody actually making the decisions? This prevents the chance of irritation caused by some slouch getting ahead, trying to run things, and stepping on toes. And if we absolutely must have a leader, I'd pitch and see who rises into the role based on how they play, rather than just elect.

That said, I'll have my post tomorrow. A few unexpected obstacles arose for me this week, delaying my efforts.

Which said essentially the same thing I did. Only first. But if the DM suggests it, it just might be a pretty solid plan to just let the topic sit tidy for a bit.