PC's are in the process of killing an important story NPC, whats one to do?

[Shyloc]

Walking back into the thief's guild to recover a summoning stone. That was part of the plan. Talking to the head of the guild. Also part of MY plan:\. Now when the PC's start swinging and think about asking questions later, what is one to do?

This NPC is a key part of the my overall story. Not a bad guy, just because one is cropping coins and doing other shady things does make him evil does it? We ended a late session last night with the thief hitting the floor after a called shot to the neck, natural 20, and he's now bleeding (-4). I know the PC's have no intensions of helping him. I could have more guild members show up and try to chase the PC's off to help me out. But that feels like I'm undercutting the well fought battle, every one barely made it thought, no one was above 3 HP.

I could just write another path to the end...

 

[twofalls]

I'd personally let him die. You can take the same material you have used to create him and put it into a different NPC (probably in a different town). Otherwise you send a message to the PC's that no matter what they do they can't change your plots. If he isn't a bad fellah, you may want to examine the general reaction to the PC's killing of him though. I just finished with a thread on morality that grew to epic thread size... there are lots of opinions out there. I *REALLY* dislike it when PC's get sword happy, and I will and do find active game retribution for those who behave like barbarians.

Edit: Even for Barbarian classed PC's.

 

[Ry]

Can he come back as undead? Get resurrected by some other power? Can you move just SOME of the plot onto another character, and let that other character bring back this guy? (that is, making him the recurring right hand man)?

Not knowing anything about your campaign, I'd personally use him to power a kind of necromantic construct or something, let him return as one of those fancy sentient constructs.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Find another way to accomplish what you want, and let the NPC die. Players find Deus Ex Machinas particularly unsatisfying -- if they take actions, have them experience the results of those actions, but don't simply invalidate them.

Don't ever build a plot or story dependent upon particular PC actions or the existence of a particular NPC or object. No such plot ever survives contact with real players.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Dang shame, and he was such a nice guy too... Let him die.

And there is a reason I don't use called shots in my games, except as alternative crits.

The Auld Grump

 

[BSF]

Let the NPC die. Whatever story was tied up with the NPC has either died with him, or it has changed in focus somehow. *shrug* It happens.

There are plenty of repercusions in the game that can happen. Perhaps the PCs lose a contact and access to certain resources. Perhaps a guild war breaks out. Perhaps the new NPC is a real bastard and it is the PCs fault he has any influence now. All sorts of what-ifs and couldabeens. Let it ride.

As far as your story goes, I can't give you any direction on how it might still come about because you didn't provide any details. But was the NPC the one driving the plot forward? If so, then things will be difficult to get back on track. If not, then the story might have just become more difficult since the PCs offed a potential ally. If there is anyone else driving the story forward, then this is just a hiccup.

Don't railroad the story plot. If you do that, then the players will feel like they will get to the end no matter what happens in the game. You have to leave some mystery there and you want to leave the possibility for success or failure. That possibility is driven by the actions/inactions of the PCs.

 

[MoonZar]

You should let the npc die.

If you do something fishy to make him live, the players could start to think that you try to control the NPC life and death whatever action the player had taken.

 

[the Lorax]

Part of what you do should depend upon how you have reacted to them killing the NPC up until now.

Did you adjudicate their actions as they took them, or did you try to talk them out of the course of action that they took, and did you say anything about your opinion of what they have done?

Assuming that you meerly went along with what your players did, and ran the encounter with the creatures that were there, I say let it go. Your players have done something that is inconvienient for you, but that's OK.

They have created a power vacuum. Let someone step up in to take the power of the old guildmaster. As the players uncover the plots, let them discover how the old, dead, guildmaster was doing things to their benefit. If you do things really well, the PCs will try to have the old guildmaster brought back from the dead themselves!

 

[Crothian]

don't expect the PCs to do what you want for your plan. Don't make plans like that, ket the PCs do what they feel they need to and then let things happen from there.

 

[MonkeyDragon]

Good thing is that this dood is the head of the thieves guild. Huzzah, he suddenly has a partner, who inherits all the plot hooks with the estate. Anybody who's clawed their way to the top of a thieves guild has got to have a whole network of allies, as well as a lot of people who want to see him brought down. So it should be fairly easy to shift the important story elements to someone else, as well as let the characters reap the benefits of opening a number ten can of worms. Dead Guy's allies are gonna want blood. His enemies may be interested in forming alliances. The allies that didn't like Dead Guy are gonna be interested. There'll be major jockeying as the power structure shifts. If they don't know it's the party who killed him, they'll be frantic.

Don't think of it as losing an NPC. Think of it as gaining enough material for a whole campaign.