"But wouldn't it be acting in accordance to the NPC expectations?" The NPC's expectations are whatever I want them to be. "If you treat every NPC as just a PC you run..they would act somewhat in the way the GM made them." Yes, except for one thing: it's worthwhile to make an NPC who's a loser, who doesn't get ahead and doesn't even seriously try to get ahead, who winds up - despite his dreams and expectations - being just another faceless schlub. If that's the "point" of the NPC, then playing the NPC that way is having them "act somewhat in the way the GM made them." Yes, a nobody can rise into the spotlight. Fiction is full of one-off characters who caught some attention and became more than bit players. But it's more full of one-off characters who remained one-off characters. "Its not as if hes making up random 'invisible borders of punishment' to scold his players." We can't really be sure of that, and as that's a common thing for GMs to do it might be the way to bet until we learn more. "Like the window vs wagon thing..both are likely hit targets of a stray arrow..why should the GM pick the wagon just because it makes it less friction ingame? That would be forcing outcomes by DM choice also, the same as you saying hes doing..just in the opposite direction." Because it's also less friction out-of-game. Let me be clear: there's not a thing wrong with the GM "forcing outcomes." That's all the GM does, whether by picking which rules to use, setting up NPC reactions, making calls on the spot, or even delgating the outcome to the player. The issue some of us are having is that sometimes GMs force outcomes that someone at the table doesn't enjoy and there is not, frankly, a good reason for doing that. "Even if its a wagon..someone owns that wagon. If they are in sight of it, I know I wouldn't appreciate someone shooting at my wagon accident or not." It's always possible to invent reasons why something might escalate. The issue is why someone would do that (to make a deeper world? to make the players sorry?) and whether it's worth bothering. "Just saying the reactions to it seem natural for some townsfolk that sees people fighting in their streets, and less like a gm punishing behavior he doesn't like." It would be just as natural for them not to do much of anything. Background characters do that all the time and the audience doesn't bat an eye, or wonder how extra's case in small claims court is proceeding. "My players are so unpredictable I have no expectations of how they act in anyplace. But I do have the NPC's reaction to their action fit how they would based on the personality I gave them. If in a quiet little town they started shooting at people, and missing..SOMEONE in the town would care, they wouldn't be just faceless cardboard cutouts that are neutral to all actions taken." Sure, they would care, but their caring doesn't have to have any impact on the PCs, especially if their caring isn't going to make for a game that's interesting right now. "Just saying the ' 200gp for smashing a window and injuring someone, something that could happen in a drunken brawl would bankrupt the average person." IS true, the average person that smashed a window, and killed someone would be pretty much 'end of the line' for them..life over, jail time and negative stigma in the town to them. And is a reasonable expectation of a average joe's live to be ruined after that. Why should random travelers in town expect less, just because they are controlled by other people. The fact that it didnt bankrupt them, goes in line with the idea of them being more than just averarge peasants, the same fees that would ruin a villager, didn't ruin you." The player isn't saying that the character should expect less, the player is saying that it's implausible for that fine to be the same as what the townsfolk receive. They're saying they don't think it makes sense that a fine for a broken window should bankrupt a local. It's breaking their fragile immersion. What the player is also /really/ saying is that they think the fine is a bit steep for what the character did, and they're not interested in the GM using that kind of disincentive. If the player didn't have an issue with the fine, they either wouldn't have raised the point, or would not have noticed the inconsistency, or would have justified it. But they did have an issue, and as this is all entirely fictional there may be no unassailably reasonable rationale the GM can provide to resolve that issue. If the GM isn't prepared to budge on the amount, then it's better to avoid the issue coming up in the first place.