Party Nearly wipes. Did I handle this right?

[Pseudopsyche]

As a DM, you must strike a balance between allowing the PCs' actions to have consequences and creating a game where one mistake can unduly punish the players. Note that the module in question lists the intended consequences of failing the skill challenge with Jelia: she doesn't help them later on and fights them instead. The listed tactics imply that she fights to the death but can be persuaded to surrender when down to her last few hp. By having her flee and join the big boss battle, you likely turned a level-10 encounter (2600 XP) into a nearly-level-12 encounter (3300 XP) (in an adventure intended for 7th-level PCs). In effect, you punished the players' decision to attack Jelia by making the boss battle incredibly difficult. What transpired may be realistic, but it doesn't sound like it was fun for your players. Whether this was good or bad depends on what kind of game you and your players want.

Personally, I would advise a more subtle touch than what you deployed in response to the players' aggression. Instead of having Jelia join Calmachia (effectively combining two encounters (one the big boss) into one), I might have had her flee to plague the PCs later. She can pursue her own agenda, instead of choosing to fight alongside the dragon that had been coercing her!

 

[Piratecat]

They made poor tactical decisions and reaped the consequences. You did fine.

 

[Stuntman]

The way I see it, you prestented an opportunity for the party to gain an ally. Instead, one of the PC's, Dave, decided to do something that no only prevented the party from gaining an ally. He also, caused that potential ally to become an additional enemy. How does this Dave guy not get any blame for what happened? From what I see, it's Dave's fault that the party got wiped.

I can understand that Bob is mad for losing his character. In the end, all he lost was his equipment. Equipment can be replaced. If anything, they can go on lower level adventures until he gets enough equipment back. It's not like he will never get any more equipment ever again. Also, how is he not upset at Dave? Is he expecting that the PC can do anything they want with no repercussions?

Best to have a talk with Dave and ask what his expectations are with regard to bad decisions by the party. I thought that Dave's attacking that NPC was a bad decision considering one PC was trying to use diplomacy. That's akin to making a lot of noise while another PC is trying to sneak around. Dave sabotaged the party and specifically another PC. Ask him what he thought of Dave's actions and the actions of the warlord. My impression is that Dave is in it for XP and treasure at least in this adventure. He seemed to be all gung ho about slaughtering anyone for XP and treasure. What if you told him he would have gotten as much XP and treasure if they worked with Jelia? I would contend that they would have gotten more XP and treasure working with Jelia than against since obviously the party failed, got some killed and lost treasure and wealth doing a resurrection. If anything, if he wanted more XP and wealth, he should have worked with Jelia.

 

[Obryn]

I'll take a page from Paranoia. Training your players is like training puppies.

IMO, you did fine. If your group can't see what happened as a logical consequence of their actions - homicidally attacking an NPC for no in-game reasons - then they are being a bunch of whiners. If they blame you rather than Dave and whomever, they're looking at you as an adversary rather than as a neutral party.

Now, sometimes you might want to play D&D but you're stuck with potential whiners anyway. No worries, can happen to the best of us, especially when we're gaming with the unfamiliar or with friends. This is where the puppy training comes in.

Look first at what kind of game you want to run. Then reward the players for that. Look next at what you don't want in your game. Punish those behaviors. At the very least, remove the temptation from crazy misbehavior by switching up your game's reward structure.

In this case, the ridiculous XP-whoring engaged in by part of the party is likely to be a part of the problem, too. Solution? Detach XP from combat. Your players can no longer get XP for killing things, only from solving problems (through combat or otherwise) and surviving.

You can do this in one of two ways - you can engineer it so that the party gets a set amount of XP every session, or you can calculate up the max XP they can get over an adventure, and assign it all at the end if the mission is successfully completed. You've taken the benefit away from randomly slaughtering NPCs, and in hope solved at least one problem.

-O

 

[Aramax]

You did fine

 

[DarkMasterBR]

Well, I also think you did fine, but saying that won't make Bob any happier, will it?

The only thing I can say, from personal experience, is that I had a similar situation. The party was supposed to be bait for a Dragon, so a rogue could get in the Dragon's cave and steal a magic item. The mission was clear: "deceive the dragon, bring him out of his cave, and get the out". Every player was well aware of that, and they were very excited with the idea (because it came in a very appropriate moment, roleplaying wise).

But when the Dragon appeared, one of those players simply decided they could take it. I mean, WTF, the DM wouldn't throw us an unbeatable foe, he wouldn't dare. So, while everyone was running and bluffing the Dragon (and having a great time, by the way), this one player just stood there burning his dailys. Alone.

Needless to say, he got crushed, big time. He was completely pissed, saying he had lost the interest for D&D and things like that. When he said that, every other player in the table looked at him and said "Shut the up. You screwed up, you died. It's part of D&D."

And then, after the game, the other players came up to me and said they had a blast, so I didn't really feel guilty. But I hated that one of the most exciting moments in the campaign was ruined by a player who did a terrible decision and didn't like the results.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Wait, did you also give Newt a free ressurection? Or just Bob because he whined?

I think that Dave guy isn't worth having in the group, and it's a shame Newt had to die for his stupidity. (I strongly reccommend "karma smart bomb" attacks in the future to punish PCs for getting the party into trouble even if logically the NPCs wouldn't nomrally be targeting them so much). Bob was also metagaming and such, but at least he had a little restraint and you say he's normally alright.

I really do want to know, did Dave actually say something to the effect of, " it, I want xp!" out loud? That's the kind of thing that in my games would cause me to drop Texas on a PC. (that's my group's generic DM threat, I don't even recall how it originated)

Oh, and yeah, you did fine, it sounds like. The party...well...some of the party made that fight harder than it should have been. I would have allowed other players to try and physically stop the aggressors from attacking in such a situation, but that kinda requires a bit of ad hoc ruling, so it's fine if you didn't offer the rest of the party that chance.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Personally, I would advise a more subtle touch than what you deployed in response to the players' aggression. Instead of having Jelia join Calmachia (effectively combining two encounters (one the big boss) into one), I might have had her flee to plague the PCs later. She can pursue her own agenda, instead of choosing to fight alongside the dragon that had been coercing her!

She had been there against her will all that time. How is she supposed to suddenly be able to flee without repurcussions? And really, while fear for your life is a powerful motivator to run, she had a friggin' dragon to go to to help with this mutual enemy. If some bully assaulted me and I had a 250 lb weight lifting friend in the next room ready to beat the tar out of him, I'm totally vengeful enough to stick around to kick that bastard in the ribs while he's down! Payback's a...you know.

 

[fanboy2000]

In this case, the ridiculous XP-whoring engaged in by part of the party is likely to be a part of the problem, too. Solution? Detach XP from combat. Your players can no longer get XP for killing things, only from solving problems (through combat or otherwise) and surviving.

Technicly, they could have gotten XP for the skill challenge as well. Acording to the DMG, they would have gotten as much xp as if they had killed her outright.

Dave, who joined the game last session, whose entering the party in the middle of the dungeon was justified by him being a member of Jelia's party before her mercenaries turned on him and her justified his hostility with the excuse that his character believed he was double crossed by Jelia. I explained that this was not the case and he would know that and told them mechanically, skill challenges are worth xp as well so this wouldn't hold up as a good strategy even if you were meta-gaming.

(Emphisis mine)

 

[Starfox]

This sounds like a chapter of Knights of the Dinner Table.

And you did good; of course the players can choose their own path, but not all paths are guaranteed to be as easy.