So I spent a good couple of hours getting materials together for my group to run "Debts to Pay". I drew up maps on isometric paper and rehearsed some unique character voices for the droids and other NPC's for my crew to enjoy. Since this is their second mission, I decided that narratively it would make more sense that Bargos the Hutt would contact them via sub-space transmission while in hyperspace after making off in their stolen YT-1300. Little did I know that my mechanic would immediately give Bargos the Hutt the finger, then hang up on him by pressing the F-You button with his extended middle finger while telling Bargos the Hutt to F-Off (technically it was Bargos' protocol droid, but you know what blabbermouths protocol droids can be). So I'm thinking that because they made me do my contingency run "Trouble Brewing", which wasn't nearly as well rehearsed, that I'll be spending all my Dark Side points to upgrade all their combat checks to include the Despair die and all combat checks against them to use Triumph die in an attempt to critical them and their vehicle to death in the future. In addition, I'm thinking about really hammering home the strain when they get Threat instead of just knocking them prone or adding it up until the crew generates enough Threat to have their cover blown etc. etc. On the one hand, I don't want to discourage them from playing, but on the other hand, if their so **** stupid that they'd give the finger to a Hutt crime boss, perhaps they've got whatever I can throw at them coming to them. Suggestions on effective in game punishment would be appreciated. Thankee kindly!

My advice is to keep the adversarial behavior strictly to the NPCs. Don't use your GM resources as punitive measures. Use them to challenge the players. You need them to trust you in order for the game to work—if they get the sense that you're actively trying to screw them over (even if you're only doing so "as much as the rules allow"), then that trust will erode in an instant.

20 hours ago, KamaKrazyWarBoy said:

Since this is their second mission, I decided that narratively it would make more sense that Bargos the Hutt would contact them via sub-space transmission while in hyperspace after making off in their stolen YT-1300. Little did I know that my mechanic would immediately give Bargos the Hutt the finger, then hang up on him by pressing the F-You button with his extended middle finger while telling Bargos the Hutt to F-Off

You created a plot choke point for yourself and got choked.

Agreed. Chock it up to a misstep on your part and move on. It is frustrating to prepare a session and then for it to go completely off the rails—but that is the nature of RPGs. Maybe next time don't prepare so specifically on such a grand scale

What if you increased some Obligation? I agree, blatantly crossing a Hutt is something that not many smart people do. And they should feel the consequences of their actions. But keep it within the narrative, and keep it sensible. Obligation increase is good. Treating every situation they encounter from here on out as more deadly, just because they derailed your plot, is bad.

I agree with @awayputurwpn and @2P51 . The only consequences they should face regarding what they did lie with their further interactions with Bargos the Hutt & those in his employ.

An obligation increase or creation, if it pertains to Bargos would be appropriate as suggested.

Another option is to use the Reputation rules and lower the group's Reputation with Bargos by 1 step if they had any positive Reputation with him previously.

Another option would be to use the regular game rules and add a Setback to future social checks when dealing with Bargos & his men, due to the nature of their last conversation and the unforgettable pride of Hutts.

As is the case with RPGs, players can go "off-rails" quite often if they don't want to follow the current plotline. It's difficult to at first, but works out for more fun in the long run if you roll with their choices, note what they did & use that knowledge in the future regarding those same plot points. Group decides not to rescue wookiee slaves when they had the means to? 2 months later, they come across some villain with some wookiee slaves in enforced labor camps, withering away their bodies & spirits. If they investigate, they find out that they are the same wookiees they chose not to save, some of the wookiees have already perished at this point and the rest will soon if they don't do anything about it. That's an appropriate response to a player choice rather than arbitrarily upgrading all the difficulties of the next session cuz they didn't do what you wanted them to.

I've had this happen to me, way back when, and I had to change my GMing style to match. No matter how much planning and prep I did for a story, my PCs would zig when I wanted a zag, usually 5 minutes into the session. Rather than try to force the story I'd created (a.k.a. "railroading") I instead spent a lot of time getting intimate with the setting - pretty much read, watch, listen to anything Star Wars - and then write down some frameworks for settings and NPCs. This approach has saved me countless times, and now when players zig, I'm right there with them. Being prepared for any situation does require effort and isn't 100% the same as being prepared intimately for specific situations, but I've found that I no longer have to spend hours prepping or try to steer the PCs in any direction. I still have overarching themes and stories that do evolve based on PC interaction or lack thereof, but no session grinds to a halt when my PCs decide to dedicate the evening to finding the best porridge on Kashyyk while the Empire is hot on their heels.

Most of the advide in this thread is pretty solid, but another thing I can recommend is this: When your players make a really stupid, unexpected decision that screws up your adventure, take a 10 minute break or so to calm down and think about things. What are their options, and what are they likely to do next (maybe even ask out of character what they are up to so you can adapt)? What are your options to advance the story and what encounters could you quickly assemble to keep the game going? What are the repercussions of their actions (and as mentioned above, they should happen in-universe)? You are playing with your players, not against them, and one of the best things to learn is to be able to quickly adapt to situations.

A couple of days ago, my players found a village, and a boy there was supposed to help them find the macguffin they were looking for. Instead, one of the PCs shot the boy (with stun setting, of course) and I wanted to punch that player in the face so hard. But we took a short break and in the end, we had a scene where the rest of the PCs were forced by the villagers to join their angry mob to chase down the offender, rolling deception to misdirect them and even though that one PC almost died, it was a blast. The repercussions on the other hand are that the village was supposed to play a larger role in the coming adventures, and they have now lost a lot of potential allies.

As the saying goes: "No campaign survives first contact with players."

So your players did something you didn't expect. Big deal, get over it. Now that Hutt has a reason to send bounty hunters and other unfriendlies their. The Hutt can also affect NPCs they may know or NPCs within his sphere of influence to treat your players negatively and tip the Hutt off.

An adversarial relationship with your players will kill any sort of game you want to run.

I am just curious, did you ask why the pc unceremoniously chose to do that? I am not familiar with these adventures, but I assume the hutt was a client, it might be worth talking about why that player felt so inclined to reject the job on the parties behalf.

otherwise as above, do not use the game as a punishment, but some thugs or low grade bounty hunters that either hunt the pcs or their ship is fun. Maybe this hurt has a sense of humour in not actually wanting the pcs caught, but just to paint a massive middle finger on their ship, or inside if they gain entry. just to make an example. Something a little funny

Thanks for the advice everyone! I am new to this so you've been a great help.

Counterpoint: occasionally you can indeed use your powers for evil, not good - but you have to do so VERY carefully in a certain set of circumstances. The one time I did? Dropping Order 66 on my all Jedi team at the end of Clone Wars era campaign. I started out the game very clearly saying "the odds are going to be very much against you, and this might be a Total Party Wipeout. Play smart" - and even then I had to strike a balance between bringing the full might of the Empire against them and crafting an interesting and satisfying story. And everyone had a fun time (and annoyingly everyone got away save for one, who died on one bad hyperspace roll, a decision I eventually overturned in the interest of having a happy ending)

But your specific circumstances? Yeah, don't do that.

Making a game challenging for fun is different than making a game challenging out of spite. The GM should, in most cases, be the PC's greatest fan. If the PCs give the GM lemons, make the tastiest lemonade possible and serve it up. Hopefully, everyone expressed what they want out of the game prior to the first session but if not, it's not too late to have that discussion. By mining their backgrounds and just looking at their character sheets, a GM can determine pretty quickly what a player is going for in a character, but nothing beats that chat.

It's important for a GM to be fair to one's self - we were all new to this at one time and we all make mistakes. Heck, I've been doing this since 1980 and I still make mistakes.