First time DM, with only one player. Looking for ideas on how to proceed.

So far, she's wandered into a small, very isolated hunting town that has reported a worrying decline in game over the last few months.

Tracked it to a cave of goblins, recruited by a drow in search of rare and exotic creatures. The goblins, in their stupidity and over eagerness have over hunted the area. 

She attempts to track the drow but fails. 

The only other lead is the recently self appointed village leader/ past his prime hunter "Al" who seems to be the only one bringing back any significant kills. He is turning the villagers against the PC, convincing them that she is responsible for their current misfortune, playing on their distrust of outsiders. 

She leaves town but is hunted down by Al and his 2 sons. She manages to scare off one son, then kill the other and capture and interrogate Al. He confesses to having made a deal with the drow, he would keep the villagers from interfering with the drow's business in exchange for recapturing his younger glory. - I hope that makes sense.

She leave Al tied to a tree, guarded by an NPC follower (adopted goblin cook), and sneaks back into town to assess the situation. The surviving son is rallying a mob to save his brother and father.

She returns to her camp, preparing to make a public trial of it only to find the NPC sedated with a drow dart and Al murdered, framing her and the NPC.

She has turned her attention to the remaining son, hoping to get evidence or a confession from him. 

There's a handful of NPCs in town that are on her side and would like a peaceful resolution. 

I know there's things I could have done differently but hindsight. 

I'm trying to keep the drow as an indirect threat as I have plans to link in her characters backstory much later. 

At the moment, she seems a bit stumped on how exactly to proceed and honestly, I can't think of a solution either. She's a half elf ranger with a beast companion and a silver raven statuette at her disposal.

Knowledge is key to finding a solution. 

• Does PC know about the friendly/peaceful NPCs, can she get to them, and are they of *any* influence to the rest of the town? 
• Who put her on the trail of the goblins/missing game, could they be one of those friendly to her?
• Is she unable to track the Drow at all? (Failed rolls are one thing, plot devices are another.)
• Is she unable to find any evidence (insert MacGuffin here) to implicate Al & Sons and their patron Drow?
• How would the world respond if she brought outside help, maybe from the two nearest towns?
• If Al made a deal, the Sons are obviously aware of, how is compensation being handled for their compliance? Foreign gold, undue wealth, mysterious magic item?

Food for thought. If a deal has been struck, there is something that ties one party to the other. Follow the money back to the source, so to speak. Garner as much support in the town as possible, quietly so as to not agitate those in opposition. If all else fails, kill the son, skip town, don't look back.

However the situation pans out, the solution should be formulated by the player. Give her enough information to make the decisions required to put a plan together. You're the DM, you get to decide how the world will respond to player input. You've already decided that the town can be swayed, but it's undecided how that push will resolve.

Well, she doesn't really have to find the drow to prove her innocence, does she? She already has a drow dart that shows someone else did it. Sure, the townsfolk might not trust her goblin sidekick but maybe she can convince them to search the home of the dead hunter & son and there they can find some incrimiating evidence? More drow darts, perhaps? Or drow gold that they have been paid with?

The solution that you need to figure out (as I see it) is how to connect the village leader to the drow without actually involving the drow. That way you can always have the drow come back later should you want to.

Quote from Kaavel >>

Knowledge is key to finding a solution. 

• Does PC know about the friendly/peaceful NPCs, can she get to them, and are they of *any* influence to the rest of the town? 
• Who put her on the trail of the goblins/missing game, could they be one of those friendly to her?
• Is she unable to track the Drow at all? (Failed rolls are one thing, plot devices are another.)
• Is she unable to find any evidence (insert MacGuffin here) to implicate Al & Sons and their patron Drow?
• How would the world respond if she brought outside help, maybe from the two nearest towns?
• If Al made a deal, the Sons are obviously aware of, how is compensation being handled for their compliance? Foreign gold, undue wealth, mysterious magic item?

Food for thought. If a deal has been struck, there is something that ties one party to the other. Follow the money back to the source, so to speak. Garner as much support in the town as possible, quietly so as to not agitate those in opposition. If all else fails, kill the son, skip town, don't look back.

However the situation pans out, the solution should be formulated by the player. Give her enough information to make the decisions required to put a plan together. You're the DM, you get to decide how the world will respond to player input. You've already decided that the town can be swayed, but it's undecided how that push will resolve.

There are some really good suggestions here. One more I'd add, assuming your beastmaster ranger likes to cast speak with animals, is to give Al and Sons a hunting dog or other (possibly mistreated) pet that can point your PC toward the evidence they need

Especially when it's a party of one and the player doesn't have anyone else to bounce around ideas and theories with/succeed on a timely skill check, it can be easy for them to miss the breadcrumbs you drop. So just keep dropping more of them

So here's my take:

First of all, the initial problem - the goblins have been hunting a lot of game - isn't really a very bad thing. The Drow and the goblins are just hunting like the villagers do, only they've been more successful at it than they have. The goblins weren't doing anything outright villainous - why shouldn't they hunt in the woods? It's a bummer for the villagers, sure, but could be resolved by negotiation.

The real villains are Al and his sons, but again, they haven't done anything terribly, outrageously bad. I'm guessing they attacked her before she killed one of them? If not then your PC is actually the real villain of the piece, which is a different problem.

Why did the Drow choose to kill Al - his ally - but sedate the goblin NPC? What was he hoping to get out of it? By all accounts, Al was in fact on his side and has the villagers' support so he can't have been silencing him from talking - there is no reason for Al to talk, and the PC has killed one of the villagers.

I think that you need to up the stakes in the plot a bit here, because as far as I can see, the initial issue was a fairly minor one (one faction had done a lot of hunting - it's hardly fair to murder them for it). What's the Drow's reason for resorting to murdering an ally? Why is hunting this particular bit of forest that important to him? He wants exotic creatures, but his goblins have decimated the local wildlife, so they're not really doing that for him.

Up the stakes to something much more nefarious:

• The Drow has been hunting the creatures to feed to an ancient evil spider that was once a fragment of Lolth (or whatever deity you have the drow using) that he seeks to free from one-hundred years of containment.
• When the spider thing has consumed enough creatures, it will be strong enough to rise from its lair and will begin striking at the town. This is business truly worth your adventurer's time.
• Al and the sons are aware of this spider monster, but they have been promised a lot of gold by the Drow. They planned to help him feed all the wildlife to the spider, and then they would abscond.
• There are clues about this in written communication between the drow and the hunters, which the PC can discover by raiding Al's home: have her discover a stack of letters that prove it. Maybe they're written in a language she can't understand, but a town NPC can so need to be shown to them. She can encounter the remaining son in the home, he attacks her and she can kill him in the fight, before presenting the evidence to the villagers. If she doesn't go to raid the home, have the son try to take her out somewhere else, and he has the letters on his person. There are multiple ways of getting this information into her hands. Maybe there are letters in the goblin cave if she goes back there.
• Al had to be silenced because he could unveil the location of the spider monster's lair. The PC doesn't know where, but the written communications should state that the goblins do know where it is. It can also mock the goblins for being foolish enough not to realise that they're on the menu too.
• The goblins aren't aware of this - they are just hunters the drow has employed. The goblins can become allies, and show the PC to the lair. There the PC can either stop the spider monster rising, by defeating the Drow, or perhaps the drow feeds himself to it so that it emerges, giving the player a climactic confrontation to end this particular story arc. Give the monster a decently challenging stat block, and she can enlist villagers or goblins or both to help fight it.
• Having defeated the enemies, good aligned villagers see what she has achieved and grants her a reward. The goblins learn to live in harmony with the villagers, or move on.

I’ll second the above - there’s plenty of ways to find incriminating evidence without the drow physically being captured. I personally would favour “find incriminating evidence In Al’s house”. The darts idea (already suggested) was my first thought - Al could be using the sedative darts, which are dosed for humanoids, to slow down larger prey, making it easier for him to get the kill.  Perhaps the son that still lives is the one using the darts and Al didn’t know about it - the son has been weakening the animals so his dad believes he can still hunt, not knowing the prey was slowed.

Another option, if she doesn’t want to go back into town out of fear of being caught, would be to find the drow’s camp. The drow, seeing that he is close to being detected, hastily leaves.  Perhaps they do a pretty good job cleaning up, but they leave behind something to incriminate them. A dart, a mostly burned letter, etc. Bonus points if the item left behind ties into your plans for the future - though perhaps you keep that part hidden, so its significance to your future plans only becomes clear in hindsight.  

Also, just a general DMing piece of advice - no use dwelling on what you could have done differently.  Every decision in this story seems like a perfectly reasonable one, designed to create a difficult situation your player needs to find a way out of. That’s perfectly fine - games need challenges like this.

Did the sons know that Al was a fake? The living son already proved a coward. She might be able to intimidate them into confessing. Alternatively, if you can prove that the drow killed Al, he might want revenge but that is tricky due to the ranger killing the brother. Or, if the mother is still around, she might know and feel guilty.

Another way would be for the goblins to know about Al and her finding and capturing some. I know she failed the survival check to find the drow, but maybe the goblin cook was left alive because he used to be part of the tribe and killing him might have turned them against the drow? The tribe could have moved, explaining why he didn't know where they were and he could be something like the chief's son and not mention it because he was afraid he would be blamed for the tribe's overhunting. Or the ranger could find a trapped animal and wait for them.

The friendly NOC could be suspiscious of Al's son and follow him around. If the son knew about the con then maybe he buried the evidence in the forest. Or maybe, since Al was helping the goblins, he was supposed to meet them at some point and the son has to go in order to see how they proceed.

They could also confront the son in public and either bluff him into thinking she has evidence and confessing. Or have them tell their story in detail and poke holes in it.

Thanks everyone for the input, I've put together what should be a cohesive narrative. 

Al mentioned during his interrogation that as well as providing kills for the him to take credit for, the drow also promised 'handsome rewards' though has never seen a coin. There is virtually no communication between the drow, humans and goblins. All exchanges were completed via dead-drops. Every so often, the drow would select a kill, the goblins would deliver it to a designated location. Due to them not knowing when the next delivery would be, they needed to check the drop site regularly - a task given to the youngest(surviving) son. However, he would also find a small sum of Drow silver, which he would stash for himself in the woods. 

One of the friendly NPCs in town is the arrow fletcher who has been curious about the father & sons as for all the hunting they have been doing, they haven't needed to purchase any more arrows in quite some time. This curiosity has led him to notice that the youngest son disappears for a little while each day. 

FYI - the Drow she spotted is only the henchman for a former Drow noble who is the head of a animal poaching/smuggling/trafficking operation. Sensing the current events are drawing too much attention and with the goblins failing to provide substantial enough profit, he is beginning to shut down this branch of the operation in order to focus his efforts elsewhere. Killing Al was just tying up a loose end and scapegoating the ranger in the process killed 2 birds with one stone. 

Does this make narrative sense? 

I think your story makes sense, but I would warn against having only one solution. DMing often is reminiscent of Schrödinger‘s famous thought experiment - you can have multiple solutions inside your head, but you only choose one once the player starts to investigate. 

The only thing that’s really important is the ultimate outcome - your character’s name is cleared and they get hints about something bigger being at play. Let them find a solution, and just be careful to avoid being pigeonholed into “they have to learn information from the fletcher, or flip the son, or find the silver.”  You just never know when someone might approach the problem from a very different direction, and should be prepared to accommodate their different approach and be successful in their efforts (if their efforts are reasonable, of course).

Oh definitely, at this point I'm not trying to anticipate the future, just getting the story so far to match up. 90% of this has been made up on the spot so I'm trying to iron out the details in a satisfying way 

Quote from Tomnickmully >>

 

FYI - the Drow she spotted is only the henchman for a former Drow noble who is the head of a animal poaching/smuggling/trafficking operation. Sensing the current events are drawing too much attention and with the goblins failing to provide substantial enough profit, he is beginning to shut down this branch of the operation in order to focus his efforts elsewhere. Killing Al was just tying up a loose end and scapegoating the ranger in the process killed 2 birds with one stone. 

Does this make narrative sense? 

 So the overall story is:

• A drow employed some goblins to do some hunting, which was so severe it reduced the animal population
• Al, a professional hunter, was allowed to take some credit for the kills, and was paid some silver for keeping the population from knowing about the goblins, even though they are directly hurting his livelihood. Despite having practically no contact from the drow, they received a small amount of silver and some fake kills (which they want, even though they are professional hunters themselves)
• The PC learns about this, but is ineffectual in tracking the drow
• Al and his sons realise the PC knows about the goblins. First he tries to turn the villagers against her, and then goes to take her out
• The PC ties up Al and kills one of his sons
• The drow kills Al, despite planning to leave the area, and not having done anything very bad prior to this anyway
• The PC can realise that the hunters haven't been doing much hunting by talking to the fletcher
• The drow will then leave the area, without any recourse from the PC

If you look at this sequence of events and remove the PC from them altogether, this is what happens:

• The drow starts his operation
• The villagers don't know about it
• Temporarily, a lot of wild animals are hunted
• The goblins fail to provide enough profit
• The drow leaves, and the villagers woes are resolved without any action

The result of the PC's interaction is therefore:

• Her actions resulted in the deaths of two of the villagers
• She does not have any impact on the hunting activities of the enemy, who just leaves anyway

So overall, I don't think that this is a very satisfying story for the PC to have participated in. Why is the Drow just going to leave? 

Quote from Sanvael >>

Quote from Tomnickmully >>

 

FYI - the Drow she spotted is only the henchman for a former Drow noble who is the head of a animal poaching/smuggling/trafficking operation. Sensing the current events are drawing too much attention and with the goblins failing to provide substantial enough profit, he is beginning to shut down this branch of the operation in order to focus his efforts elsewhere. Killing Al was just tying up a loose end and scapegoating the ranger in the process killed 2 birds with one stone. 

Does this make narrative sense? 

 So the overall story is:

• A drow employed some goblins to do some hunting, which was so severe it reduced the animal population
• Al, a professional hunter, was allowed to take some credit for the kills, and was paid some silver for keeping the population from knowing about the goblins, even though they are directly hurting his livelihood. Despite having practically no contact from the drow, they received a small amount of silver and some fake kills (which they want, even though they are professional hunters themselves)
• The PC learns about this, but is ineffectual in tracking the drow
• Al and his sons realise the PC knows about the goblins. First he tries to turn the villagers against her, and then goes to take her out
• The PC ties up Al and kills one of his sons
• The drow kills Al, despite planning to leave the area, and not having done anything very bad prior to this anyway
• The PC can realise that the hunters haven't been doing much hunting by talking to the fletcher
• The drow will then leave the area, without any recourse from the PC

If you look at this sequence of events and remove the PC from them altogether, this is what happens:

• The drow starts his operation
• The villagers don't know about it
• Temporarily, a lot of wild animals are hunted
• The goblins fail to provide enough profit
• The drow leaves, and the villagers woes are resolved without any action

The result of the PC's interaction is therefore:

• Her actions resulted in the deaths of two of the villagers
• She does not have any impact on the hunting activities of the enemy, who just leaves anyway

So overall, I don't think that this is a very satisfying story for the PC to have participated in. Why is the Drow just going to leave? 

 
In light of other posts by OP, this is not the end of the story, but a smaller part in the tale. The Drow is apparently part of a larger plot device as a subordinate.

Thus, in greater context, the entire affair introduces an antagonist, gives the PC a reason to dislike the antagonist, and gives the PC a reason to find the antagonist, tracking the antagonist to the bigger story the Drow is a part of.  It also seemed to be implied that the Drow left specifically because of the PC - the Drow saw someone was looking into them and decided the possible payoffs were not worth the trouble of dealing with the PC.

All together, that seems to work out pretty well. 

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >> 

In light of other posts by OP, this is not the end of the story, but a smaller part in the tale. The Drow is apparently part of a larger plot device as a subordinate.

Thus, in greater context, the entire affair introduces an antagonist, gives the PC a reason to dislike the antagonist, and gives the PC a reason to find the antagonist, tracking the antagonist to the bigger story the Drow is a part of.  It also seemed to be implied that the Drow left specifically because of the PC - the Drow saw someone was looking into them and decided the possible payoffs were not worth the trouble of dealing with the PC.

All together, that seems to work out pretty well. 

 But the situation is resolved, and the only damage the Drow caused was killing off someone who had attacked the PC, whilst incapacitating but otherwise not harming the NPC left to watch over him. Given that the PC had already killed Al's son before the Drow killed Al, I don't see that the PC has any reason to go after the Drow, unless they have a major interest in arbitrating hunting territory disputes.

To make narrative sense, as the OP is asking about, and justify the killing of Al's son, there needs to be something bigger at stake than just whether there was a reduced amount of game available.

Okay, the "high stakes" end goal will be a massive attack of a wood elf capital city by a matron mother out to prove herself to Lolth. The same matron mother responsible for PC parent during the massacre of a smaller wood elf settlement - cliche orphan PC backstory, raised by Tiefling of mysterious origin who was assassinated a year ago but hey, it's her first time playing.

The animal abductions are part of the overall strategy, enabling a small force of drow druids to adopt more suitable wild shapes in order to scout/infiltrate the wood elf territory. 

Over the course of the campaign, the drow will be gathering other resources to prepare for the assault - magic items, recruiting allies to raid and destabilise neighbouring settlements, taking slaves etc. 

This is very much the opening act in what is intended to be slow burn campaign.

That sounds cool. Don't be afraid to get the player knowing about the bigger stuff early on - the more investment they have in the story from the off, the better!

Nothing wrong with her backstory at all: it's a dangerous world out there and player characters, being extraordinary people, are more likely than most to have suffered loss in the past. I know there's this trend of wanting characters to just be quirky people who just somehow bumbled into an adventure (which is almost completely implausible - even Bilbo retired after his first outing), but personally I think your player has the right idea.

Oh yeah I've got no problem with it, clichés work. For bonus twist points, I want her Tiefling foster parent to be linked to the drow. Maybe a daughter of the matron mother, exiled/left for dead after a botched ritual turned her into a Tiefling. 

It looks like your solution has been covered, but I'd just like to put a blanket warning out for the future: when you DM, and especially if it's only to one player, then you should give them a win every now and then even if it doesn't make sense in the story. Reading your post and putting myself into the shoes of the player, it seems like it would be incredibly frustrating to have your work to uncover this scheme destroyed multiple times. I know that per the story it makes sense to have it happen, but what if the next time she were to capture a hostage, they didn't get mysteriously assassinated? 

This might not be a problem at all in your game and I might be reading too much into it, but it's food for thought. Keeping a villain on the back burner can make for a fun big reveal, but having them harry the player(s) for too long without any chance to figure things out can really dampen the fun imo. 

Quote from VanZoeren >>

It looks like your solution has been covered, but I'd just like to put a blanket warning out for the future: when you DM, and especially if it's only to one player, then you should give them a win every now and then even if it doesn't make sense in the story. Reading your post and putting myself into the shoes of the player, it seems like it would be incredibly frustrating to have your work to uncover this scheme destroyed multiple times. I know that per the story it makes sense to have it happen, but what if the next time she were to capture a hostage, they didn't get mysteriously assassinated? 

This might not be a problem at all in your game and I might be reading too much into it, but it's food for thought. Keeping a villain on the back burner can make for a fun big reveal, but having them harry the player(s) for too long without any chance to figure things out can really dampen the fun imo. 

 That is a good point, I imagine it would get very tiresome if all your ideas are getting thwarted without any way of avoiding it. I mainly did it that time to try and give a sense of being watched, Stoke the paranoia a little. Something I'll do sparingly.