Need help with EPS (Extreme Player Stupidity)

[Xar]

All right, this happened last time in my campaign: the PC's (all first level) were exploring an interdimensional maze of sorts. To leave the place they needed to gather all the scattered pieces of a puzzle. They encountered some NPC's some friendly, some not, when they found a room full of paranoid cultists who had one of the pieces in possession. As it is a Planescape campaign, most of the players knew that it was better to roleplay in most situations.

One of them didn't. Lighting a smokestick he grabbed the puzzlepiece and ran out of the room. All players followed him. Of course, the people in the room didn't really liked that, so grabbed their weapons and ran after them. Pretty angry now, of course.

Now I have a dillema about what to do next. The whole encounter was meant to be role-played. One of the players was allready chatting up with one of the cultists and they appeared to be friendly albeit a bit crazy (they kept telling that they had to be quiet else the Lady would throw them all into a maze ). Actually, they could just ask for the puzzle piece and they would got it without any problems. Now everything is messed up by the stupidity of one of the players. Even if the cultists are all 1st level, they are still stronger than the PC's (there are 8 of them). Escape is impossible as they still need several pieces. Do I now have to kill them all (or some of them)? Seems a bit harsh to me, as we just began this campaign and they had lotsa work on their background. Wouldn't solve anything at all. But I still need some way to punish them, as it was extremely stupid what they did (the player said he has an impulsive character... but doing stuff like this with an int of 14 is just unheard of). Take away their stuff? They don't have anything of value and besides, the cultists are raging (They angered the Lady! Now we are all mazed! ).

So does anybody have some good ideas to solve this? In a way that is still realistic?

 

[hong]

I don't see the problem here. Violence is a perfectly acceptable solution to most problems in D&D. Always has been, always will be.

Okay, now that I've got that out of the way, why is it automatically "stupid" for the players to think of a solution you didn't anticipate? Stealing the puzzle piece is one of the first things I'd have considered when designing the adventure. Just have the cultists chase them down, and have them fight the PCs if necessary. If some of them die, well, that's the downside of trying to do wild, crazy stuff. Just don't go to extremes of trying to kill off the characters as "punishment" for what they did. A vindictive DM is no fun to play with.

 

[Wolfspider]

Just don't go to extremes of trying to kill off the characters as "punishment" for what they did. A vindictive DM is no fun to play with.

In the same token, don't spare their lives arbitrarily just because you don't want to be accused of being a vindictive DM. They chose to provoke a group of armed cultists by stealing something that they prize highly (and perhaps insanely). Although it might have been possible to talk to them previously, I don't think they will be open to parlay now. They'll let their weapons do the talking.

By the way, I'd have a talk with the person who stole the puzzle pieces. It's poor form (and downright rude) to disrupt the party's plans like this. It might get a lot of them killed.

 

[el Voz]

As much As I encourage role playing I may have missed something.

The players are suppose to get the puzzle pieces, 1 PC stole a piece. What is the problem?

But Would n't the cultist go after the thief? Not neccesarily the whole party. Have them ignore/parly with the other PCs and just go after the original thief.

 

[Wolfspider]

But Would n't the cultist go after the thief? Not neccesarily the whole party. Have them ignore/parly with the other PCs and just go after the original thief.

This is one way of doing it, although I figure that the party won't just stand by when a party member is getting trashed. And the cultists might very well view the party as guilty by association. (They're paranoid, remember?)

 

[hong]

In the same token, don't spare their lives arbitrarily just because you don't want to be accused of being a vindictive DM.

Given that this DM is going around calling his/her players "extremely stupid", I don't see this as a major consideration.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don`t know anything about the cult, but perhaps they will try to capture the thief (with or without the rest) and than try to "convert" him from doing such stupid things and so on...

 

[Wolfspider]

Given that this DM is going around calling his/her players "extremely stupid", I don't see this as a major consideration.

I prefer the expression "tactically deficient" myself.

 

[Xar]

Well, it wasn't actually stealing. He knew that the cultists would see him, the smokestick was to cover his escape. Not stupid? It was as unnecessary as hell. The cultists were extremely friendly, they wanted to give the players shelter and food. He took it in full convidence, and suddenly weapons were everywhere. If I just let them go unpunished they will get to cocky, and in Planescape that would be fatal. Just picking out the thief? The rest of the group wouldn't like that very much. Would you kill off the whole party at 1st level when they mess up the negotiations with a dragon? No fun for DM and players. I am sure there are other alternatives to solve this.

 

[Andor of the Blade]

We had a similar situation back when our party was first level. There was a "chaotic" character who was constantly doing the opposite of what the party decided to do. So we kicked him out (the character, not the player).

The PCs aren't going to want to travel with someone who consistently puts their lives at risk and won't co-operate as party member. I see no problem with the cultists killing the "thief" and the party stepping aside to let them. Actions do have consequences.

Is it possible the PCs running after the "thief" could be "spun" into, "We were trying to stop him to bring the puzzle piece back to you?"

It will probably be much more difficult, now, for the surviving party members to get the piece they need.