High level and holding back

What do you think of high-level PCs holding back? What do you think of the arguments presented below? Will they frequently apply to PCs? To your group?

High-level PCs are powerful heroes whose reputation precedes them. They have amassed great power and should be allowed to put it to brilliant use. That said, there are times when, strategically, the PCs will not want to bring the full force of their power to bear. While it might be both satisfying and effective to cast hold person on the thief fleeing with your stolen treasure, there are good reasons why a PC might hold back:

1. A sporting chance: Bravado is a common trait of heroic figures. The idea that a master of some art loves to be tested may lead to PCs choosing not to try other options just for the joy of testing themselves (and proving their superiority!). Perhaps the PC simply doesn’t believe that anyone could pull a fast one on them. In either case, such role-playing merits extra experience points, anywhere from 10 to 20 times the character’s level.

2. Conservation of energy: You never know when you’re going to need those vastly powerful yet limited resources, so it is better to keep them stored up for truly desperate situations.

3. I’ve got a reputation to maintain: In the case of reputable heroes, sending the entire party against a meager thief and interrogating him with force and magic would be detestable to anyone observing. Such a disproportionate response is never seen as heroic. When others witness or learn of the PC’s dishonorable actions, their reputations could suffer.

4. Observed by their enemies: In this case, a PC might not want to give away her hand too son to her enemies. Once an enemy knows a PC’s strengths, they can tailor defenses to counteract those strength. Embroiled in political intrigue, the PCs often won’t know when their enemy’s servants are observing them.

How about these reasons for holding back:

5. He's worth more alive: If an enemy can be questioned for useful information, or traded for a ransom or a favour, it's better to keep him alive than to disintegrate him.

6. He didn't detect as evil: Darn!

I'm particularly fond of #2 and #3 from your list.

At high levels, one of the consistent challenges is effectively gauging your opponent, their motivation, and their tactics. Act too quick, and you've wasted valuable resources. Delay too long, and it will be over before you can act. Resources must be spent (by the PC's) to address these concerns, and make quick and effective judgements on the use of their resources.

On the other hand, suppose that the thief (pick pocket) in question, is a master thief, and a scourge of the town, bolstering his reputation by striking it's leaders! Without question, he warrants the use of up to the high level party's full force, however, disintegrating a thief in the midst of one's own town, can certainly have the wrong affect on a leader's reputation. Leaders must exude quiet confidence, coolness under duress, and absolute assurance in the forces that secure the city (including him) and the existing legal system.

Unless of course, you're evil. Then you turn him to dust, right there on the street. Followed by maniacal laughter...

I think the 3rd reason is so much underused IMXP...

Players tend to always think that if someone does something questionable to them, they should punish him immediately, even if they're pretending to play good characters. They don't seem to remember how they themselves sometimes detest RL powerful people who use their power to trump the others when they don't behave as their wish.

Imagine a RL police officer (to mention someone with actual practical power, given by both his police role and his gun) who gets robbed of his own wallet and instead of arresting the thief he beats him up to a pulp. Or a local politician who uses his power to destroy the life and job of a journalist who wrote a bad article about him. Just examples of behaviours that affect your reputation badly: even a villain may decide not to do such a thing if his strategy is to keep a facade (but not if his strategy is based on fear and domination).

That's of course about high-level PCs versus weak opponents. There are other reasons why they may hold back:

7. The effort of going past a small thing takes the PCs away from the more important ones (something as simple as not to have time)

8. They may actually purposefully hold back against the small fish if they think it's better to get the big fish behind

While against a big, equal or stronger opponent, there could be very different reasons:

9. They may want to avoid open conflict, knowing that with such a clash of high-powers lots of innocents would get involved

10. They may want to investigate their opponent's motivations, skills and plans, to be sure that fighting is the best/only solution, or otherwise try a different approach (e.g. they may be good and try to "convert" the BBEG)

11. They may just want to get more power or knowledge before the actual final duel, to maximize their chances of success

Quickleaf said:

What do you think of high-level PCs holding back? What do you think of the arguments presented below? Will they frequently apply to PCs? To your group?

Click to expand...

In the games I have ran or played in, it was more a NPC's thing than a PC's. Players usually don't bother to think about it, the only thing I have seen them do is to not waste spells on minor targets.

I haven't seen that, Turanil; my players hold back all the time. They are pretty careful about their resources, and they only seldom unleash all of their big guns.

It's fun to watch when they do.

How about reasons to NOT hold back?

1. If you are playing a character who has struggled his whole life and trying to portray him plausibly, then he is more likely to deal with any threat with swift and decisive action, even if it isn't with his most powerful tools. In fact, the "hold person on the thief" IS the more restrained and civil action, tantamount to Tasering a threat instead of magic missile, or fireball, or power word kill. Even so, the PC will probably want to use a level of force that implies NO foolishness is suffered, even if the PC is good and prone to restraint.

2. A threat that appears to be lightweight, but instead deceives you by its seeming worthlessness, is a good way for enemies to catch you off-guard. Better to gauge an enemy properly than be caught looking like the beneficent buffoon. Just because you are using non life-threatening magics and abilities doesn't mean you use Entangle instead of Dominate or Hold Monster. If you use Hold person, that Doppleganger Assassin is going to laugh and hand you your overconfident behind...

I think the best way to get PCs to not release both barrells on a minor threat is to make sure that they understand tha it is indeed a minor threat. IME, players are 'overly cautious' when it comes to dealing with perceived threats -- mean that they unleash their biggest attacks immediately, just in case the street urchin happens to be a level 25 Assassin. If it is obvious that it is just a street kid, then they aren't going to go overboard. This is a little metagamey, yeah, but pretty much everything players do in response to the scenarios a DM presents are tempered by metagaming (and since it is a game, it isn't necessarily a bad thing).

Suggestions regarding depleted resources, or the possibility of depleting resources prior to a big fight, got me thinking: I think I have underused this tool pretty much my entire GMing career, and I want to change that fact. I prefer bigs fight and momentous events to 'crawlin', but the more I think about D&D and its inherent system qualities, the more I think this is a mistake and may be the main factor in why my BBEGs always get their butts handed to them by the PCs (something for which I am sadly notorious). If there is a big fight, it usually happens independently and there is a day or a week or a month of game time before the next one.

Is this hurting the game? Does this make life too easy for the PCs? How do I mitigate it?

(sorry for the possible threadjack)

Yeah, Len, "he's worth more alive" is a good one I need to use more.
Thanks Li Shenron! A lot of good ideas about deterrence and gathering info!

Henry said:

How about reasons to NOT hold back?

Click to expand...

Great point Henry! I figured this was the norm for most players, who could find many reasons to go all out, so I didn't think it needed pointing out. ANd perhaps the hold perosn on the horse thief is not the best example...

Quickleaf said:

What do you think of high-level PCs holding back?
...
While it might be both satisfying and effective to cast hold person on the thief...

Click to expand...

So, what do you consider high level... 5th?

2. Conservation of energy: You never know when you’re going to need those vastly powerful yet limited resources, so it is better to keep them stored up for truly desperate situations.

Click to expand...

This would be the most common reason, I think.

The other ideas also sound reasonable. I don't see why 1) should give any extra XP, tho.
It's a deliberate choice to make things less easy, that shouldn't change the actual danger the person is in. Now, if that was done in a situation, where it would seriously lower the chances to actually win, and it would be in alignment with the character's personality, then I could see, why this should be worth a reward (accepting a considerable and unnecessary disadvantage in order to maintain the role).

Bye
Thanee