D&D 5E What should the backlash be? Your ideas wanted

[Olgar Shiverstone]

The PCs are now rain gods, and storm clouds follow them around to cheer them up with a little rain.

Or, they've now just earned the eternal enmity of a cabal of elemental wizards, and revenge is dish best served cold with a side of fire, lightning, and acid.

 

[MoutonRustique]

If you're using the "we can rebuilt it" route, I would add a serious complication.

By serious complication, I don't mean a hard dungeon or boss that possess a piece - that's expected, and even, usually FUN for the PCs. So yeah, not a drawback the player's can feel - unless they are incredibly deep into character and fear combat and strife on a personal level - but that would be an atypical D&D game to say the least!

The one I prefer : have the artifact require the willing sacrifice of an entity of vast power.
- the sacrifice need not be dying for it. Having it be a constant sequestration is more impressive and gives greater options. Perhaps the PCs will be bound by oath to fulfill tasks for it - since it can't leave that place, and they kind of owe it...
- the entity needn't even be affected by the problem : i.e. it's not it's problem, why should it sacrifice so much?
- the entity could be a great protector of something else. Trade a storm-devastated region for an orc-invaded one ?
- etc.

The difficulty is always in making the players feel it - in most games, you could say a character has to suffer horrendous pain (I'm talking serious pain here, not just stabbed through the foot by a dagger a few times) for 5 minutes every time it wakes. It would be part of the backstory, might get referenced a few times - but I doubt you'd find a player afraid to let its character sleep... IME

 

[transtemporal]

I don't know why there has to be consequences. They had good reason to smash it and it was the smart thing to do given that apprentice was getting th' ol' crazy Saruman-eyes!

Of course if someone warns them not to press the big red button because of x consequence and they decide to ignore the warning and do it anyway, then go nuts. But punishing them for making a smart decision says "You're screwed no matter what choice you make".

 

[Sunseeker]

I don't know why there has to be consequences. They had good reason to smash it and it was the smart thing to do given that apprentice was getting th' ol' crazy Saruman-eyes!

Of course if someone warns them not to press the big red button because of x consequence and they decide to ignore the warning and do it anyway, then go nuts. But punishing them for making a smart decision says "You're screwed no matter what choice you make".

I'll disagree for a couple reasons:

The outcome of any given action is not always known. Destroying ancient artifacts comes with great risk, which means a greater number of possible outcomes. If every decision was made with perfect knowledge, there really wouldn't be much point to making a decision because there's only be one real choice.

Sometimes you are just screwed, no matter which choice you make. Leave the relic alone? Drives wizard power crazy. Take relic? There's now a break in the circuit, crazy wizards hunt you down or the object just screams power in all directions attracting dangerous foes. Destroy the relic, the wizard goes mad with grief, the relic was his last hope to restore his petrified lover to life and spends the rest of his days hunting you down. Perhaps the gods become angry.

Or perhaps nothing happens at all.

All of these are perfectly viable options.

@OP: I'm a big fan of laying out some potential outcomes and then letting the dice decide. Pick your top 5 outcomes, roll a d6, on a 1, nothing happens, lucky them. If you want a better probability range, take a d20, remove the 20 and the 1 for either spectacular bad business and nothing at all, then spread the remaining options over the remaining numbers.

What the players should never have is perfect knowledge.

 

[Gilladian]

I don't know why there has to be consequences. They had good reason to smash it and it was the smart thing to do given that apprentice was getting th' ol' crazy Saruman-eyes!

Of course if someone warns them not to press the big red button because of x consequence and they decide to ignore the warning and do it anyway, then go nuts. But punishing them for making a smart decision says "You're screwed no matter what choice you make".

The actual situation was a little different, and might lead people to suggest other options:
Wizard A (highly powerful and skilled) died of probable natural causes, leaving his senior journeyman in charge. Journeyman proposes using artifact to summon and bind a fire elemental. Why? I don't know, and it really doesn't matter. Apprentice (the one the PCs meet) says "really bad idea, dude, I'm not helping!" and goes into his room and locks the door. Journeyman tries to summon elemental, and fails. He's thrown into the elemental void, or killed, or whatever. Vanishes. Storm Keep is then in big trouble - storms are being drawn to the artifact, and the fire elemental that was summoned is locked to the crystal, but free to act as he pleases. He's trying to break free of the summoning circle so he can fully enter the material plane and start his reign of destruction. PCs show up. PCs defeat elemental with help of Apprentice (minor help, but still...). The PCs question the apprentice. He explains what happened. PC says "how do we know Journeyman existed? I bet you did this. This crystal is too dangerous to leave in your hands." Attempted smash, near miss rescue, followed by full-on destructive drop-kick of crystal. Apprentice is furious, orders PCs to leave. They leave, laughing because "they solved all his problems and he's mad!".

 

[Abraxas]

The actual situation was a little different, and might lead people to suggest other options:

Given the description of events here I suggest the following

1) Nothing happens because of the crystals destruction in and of itself. In fact destroying it when there is no one really able to control it properly present was probably a good thing.

2) The apprentice has now become an enemy who is going to devote himself to repairing the crystal and then using it's power to make life tough for the PCs - they've just created their own recurring villain. Allow the apprentice to study the Wizard A's notes and

a) perhaps find a way to make a deal with powerful elemental entities for a quick route to power or

b) find out that repairing the crystal is not a difficult task because the PCs didn't use the proper method to destroy it permanently or

c) learn that that if you were willing to lose the crystal's other powers you could take shards from it and imbed them in creatures - granting those creatures elemental powers but subjecting them to your control as long as you possess the largest crystal

 

[transtemporal]

They leave, laughing because "they solved all his problems and he's mad!".

Lol, they sound kinda douchey.

Have an evil organisation hear of the fracas and send someone to retrieve the crystal (which handily is not guarded by the wizard, the elemental or the PCs). The PCs hear that the crystal and the apprentice are missing along with whatever evidence they need to ascertain he was kidnapped. They investigate. They find the hideout and rescue the apprentice. The apprentice is an agent of a good organisation who was trying to moderate the actions of his slightly-unhinged but generally-good master but then the master died and the PCs came in and mucked things up. Meanwhile, the evil organisation is using the crystal for nefarious purposes.

Or you could mix it up a bit and have the apprentice be an agent of the evil organisation who is now in the doghouse because he let the PCs blow up the crystal. Model the now-revealed villain apprentice on Burke from Aliens.

 

[Gilladian]

Hmmm... I like the idea of the apprentice getting kidnapped by bad guys. I'll have to think on that one.