D&D 5E Need an outsider's perspective here.

[Satyrn]

1) Yes, in that I agree that I should have had the witch interact with them sooner. However, I wanted to give them the chance to also take the option of killing the witch without talking to her.

Maybe next time, give her an Igor, some slovenly, dim witted butler for them to talk to first, while she's off busy elsewhere. Someone else they can talk to to gain more, real info. From him they can about everything, and then choose what to do about the witch. Or they can just slaughter him if they so choose.


I've been writing up a large dungeon, and one of the things I'm most eager to see in action are the various transitions I've created to signal to the players "oh hey, this isn't just killing everything right now." Your situation reminds me of the Lich's level, the entrance guarded by skeletons. And because the PCs could still be really low level when they get there, I realized I had to make it really clear that this area is for talking, not fighting. As such, the skeleton guards are called off or the PCs are welcomed in by the spectral voiceof the lich. There then remains a bit of map for them to explore before meeting the lich, but I hope I've provided space for options and a clear signal that fighting is not the default choice as it was on the floor below.

 

[Sunseeker]

NPCs going overboard with their demands, especially when they're obviously more powerful and more skilled than the party is pretty much a staple of D&D. Your players sound like sore losers who wanted loot and XP and noone to question their motives. That's fine for a chaotic neutral wizard (seriously, there's your problem with this guy, he's chaotic neutral) but that's a terrible motivating force for a paladin. On top of that, once they were in the home the paladin heard the chanting and should have been immediately aware that the witch was alive and therefore stealing from her was a bad deed. (not knowing her alignment he shouldn't assume she is evil based on rumors).

Breaking in is understandable, they were running from these scarecrows.

If your players don't learn from this experience then they're probably not going to. I'm not sure what else you can do to teach them though.

 

[iserith]

I would have just had the witch slay them both for long resting in a hostile environment. They got off light by being allowed to leave in my opinion. The witch would be making a potion out of eye of paladin right now if I were the DM.

 

[BoldItalic]

As I see it, there is no problem. You have successfully taken the players out of their comfort zone and now they are hooked. They are motivated to return and "get even". They've always wanted to kill monsters and take their stuff, because "that's what the game is about" but up until now they have been just going through the motions. This time it's personal. They want to kill that witch and take (back) her stuff. Great! Let them. Just put obstacles in their path.

This time, the witch is ready for them. She has booby trapped the scarecrows to explode if they are killed. The door to her tower is magically locked and warded. There are rune traps inside. The stairs are blocked by gelatinous cubes. There are now three witches, because she has called in the rest of her coven and her two sisters really are evil. Their broomsticks are animated plants. They have brewed a cauldron of something that gives off poisonous fumes, to which they are somehow immune. They have familiars that follow the PCs around and spy on them constantly. The whole tower is full of spooky noises.

Nothing too impossible, you want them to feel they can succeed if they try hard enough, but try to make every step of the way into a memorable event.

 

[fjw70]

I don't think you did anything wrong. The PCs mistakes were to rest in a hostile environment and then be rude to the witch.

 

[hopeless]

Was this a set up for the Witch to tutor the Wizard?

Was considering a Dragon Age style game where it was revealed demons were escaping by replacing themselves with unwary locals and visitors who were unaware of the danger as they had killed the local Guardian as in an elven Druid.

Had a plan where the players would be visting the area with one character newly married to a half elven healer who wasn't interested in becoming anything with the Chantry and figured what you described would happen forcing the npc to sacrifice herself to seal away any remaining demons and free the captives who were held in tree form so quite a few had been chopped down and turned into homes and other rather nasty stuff that would turn the resulting town into a literal charnel house as well as widow the newly married would be Grey Warden as I can't see any player willing to turn against the Chantry for their character's progression!

Maybe have someone kill the witch and her ghost haunts them demanding they bring her killer to justice and find her replacement so she can help them seal away the evil their stupidity released?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Since I don't have the players' impressions of what happened during the session, I have to assume I don't actually have all the details that matter for determining exactly what it was that went wrong - though it is clear that something indeed went wrong.

It seems like the most likely culprit here is communication. Often times as a DM one things they have made something clear, but the players do not see things the same way. The only fix for this, in my experience, is to learn how to be clearer to your players - learn what they take from different words so that you can use the words that give them the impression you mean for them to have, without hoping they will take the meaning you would take from your words which doesn't always work out. And when it becomes clear that they aren't on the same page with you, correct that rather than leave them with the consequences of thinking they knew what you meant when they didn't.

I find the easiest way to be sure my players are on the same page as me is to be explicit. In this example, that would mean asking them right before they attempt to take a long rest "So you are going to hide in the basement for hours, knowing that someone lives here and is at home, upstairs, and will be able to find that their lock was broken and some of their belongings are missing?" because what might be clear to you (that the witch is going to realize the intrusion, and then investigate to determine the extent of the obvious theft) isn't necessarily clear to the players (who might be, like a player of mine often does, thinking their options are limited in ways that they really aren't such as "We can't leave because there are scarecrows outside, so we have to stay here." and "Whoever is upstairs is likely in control of those scare crows outside, and since those attacked us so will they." Which are entirely reasonable thoughts, they just aren't the only possible reasonable thoughts given the circumstances).

 

[knasser]

Honestly, I would be delighted with an adventure such as you prepared for them. Depth, clever ideas and unpredictable. What's not to like?

Your players sound entitled and I don't think you're wrong to use that word. The issue when the witch demands redress isn't that the witch is wrong, it's that the players don't seem to want to own up to the idea that they are. Given the nature of D&D, it's reasonable that the PCs broke into a tower they thought was abandoned and tried to sack it. But you never tried to punish them for that, they were able to get away with it just by returning what they stole and apologising. It was only when they started getting high and mighty with the owner of the home they had just broken into when they were clearly in the wrong that you went further (justifiably).

Honestly, your players sound as though they just aren't people who take responsibilty for themselves. The player wanting to create a new character to get out of the situation (and I'd lay good odds that the new character still tries to "get even" with the witch on the player's behalf) is the stand-out example of this.

I hate it when players just want a power fantasy and to never be wrong. It inevitably forces me into an adversarial role with them.

 

[The Old Crow]

Sounds like the adventurers got misleading information from the town, and then afterwards got handed a janitor's mop and all the blame which the town and witch share in. This can be frustrating for players, and maybe lead to them digging in their heels to make at least something they decided on doing not be a waste of time. I think the only hope is to make this more interesting and rewarding an adventure than just cleaning up a mess that wouldn't have happened if they ignored the whole adventure to start with.

 

[jasper]

One talk with your players to see if their game style matches yours. Do they want to be murder hobos where they always get a get out of jail card because they are the stars? Or do bad deeds cause bad things to them.
Since one player just wants to bring in another pc then the Paladin is in trouble. I see three different ways to settle this. 1. New pc and paladin fights the witch and win. 2 They lose. And the witch becomes a minor villain for a couple episodes. Too many ways to plot this after the lost.
3. They run away and never go back.