Eh. To me it's a question of the philosophy of PCing. To quote the DM:
not so sure about the character idea, though. Someone determined to be a hero is likely to oversell him or her- self, take too much on and get killed; someone with an objective or a conscience, with a dream to chase or a principle to defend, is about right; not setting out for adventure, that's do-able- it can always come and get you; but a character who wants a quiet life and to not have strange and dangerous things happen to him... you can take the principle of "never voulnteer" too far.
At this point my usual take on a character who wants to dodge the plot (whatever it may turn out to be) is "Fine- assume you succeed, the character goes on to have a peaceful, happy retirement. Next idea?" The character needs to be more willing to come forwards than it sounds so far- an outlaw might work, there are possibilities to be had, but he has to be up for them.
If the only reason your character is along is because he happens to be, well,
along, and if he really is just in it for the money, no ulterior motives, no "I need a huge pile of money to ransom my father from prison..." well, that might make a realistic person, but they don't make good PCs. Too much crudity, too much self-conscious roughness, too much refusal to go do something dangerous at the important moment.
For a good PC there has to be some real drive- an incentive to act on the heroic scale, because only heroic-scale individuals affect their surroundings the way PCs are supposed to. The PC's intentions may not be
good: "I want to be the most powerful wizard in the world" or "I want revenge on everyone who ever insulted me" or "I want to tear down the kingdom" can all be unpleasant but plausible ambitions that work as well for a PC as they do for a campaign villain. This is why PCs stand out in a world full of NPCs who have greater or equal power: they're the ones who actually go out and slay the dragon, instead of lounging in a palace saying "yeah, that dragon had
better not come here looking for trouble."
Alfred fights, at least to a certain extent, for honor- and, yes, because it's something he actually rather likes doing, probably enjoys the status that comes with being a noble and a warrior enough that he can't imagine quitting even though it's dangerous. His class explains his conduct.
Bryan- well. Whatever may be said about the player, the character was at heart a goodish man. He had things to fight for- his own self-image as a protector if nothing else.
Rohal fights, or this is my impression, because he's trying to prove he's not a monster, that
he's not one of the things that the righteous man would want to see purged from the world. So he's driven by a perpetual, self-sustaining desire for atonement.
Larric's an odd case. What he really
wants to do in life is something best done in a peaceful world where he can poke around in a lab for twenty years, but as I'm playing him, he's got a weird spark of heroic impulse- "you've got this power and this clear sense of what needs doing, so
do it." Because otherwise he wouldn't even have shown up to the first adventure. The character, it turns out, has something to fight for- a sense of local loyalty to the county and barony he lives in and a dislike/distrust of the forces threatening it. How far up the scale that goes, how he reacts in a complicated political environment where there are no clear right answers, that's an open question, but one that can have interesting answers instead of just a boring "I'm not getting paid enough to worry about this."
If all William's got to fight for is his purse, why is he going to keep accompanying everyone else in the group? If there's nothing there under the surface, then maybe you should start over with someone else after we get Radulf into custody,