With the guy who's currently DMing... bad guys that can teleport / plane shift / etc. have tended to run away when combat began badly for them. The guy who was usually DMing before then tended to have the bad guys stand and fight. While the former's certainly more reaslistic in most cases, taking three or four shots at the same bad guy when you're trying to contrive a way of defeating its "run away" ability or to take it down so quickly that it can't run away can be a bit frustrating.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
How often do your bad guys run away?
- Thread starter NewJeffCT
- Start date
They almost always run away when they believe it is suicide to stand and fight and wish to live to fight another day, unless...
They are enraged with bloodlust (then they may not even know they are losing), they are protecting there home oe women and children (if they care about such), running away from battle is against some deep sense of honor, against their religion by Crom, death is better than your BBEG boss making an example of you as a deserter, your body is likely to be recovered and you'll be raised, etc. Those are mostly "bad guy" motivations for standing their ground to the death.
Sometimes they surrender instead if they feel they may be given quarter or they are too valauble alive. On the latter they will cetainly explain this while defednding themselves and I've had one evil captain level leader intentionally wasted his last few ogres against the PCs why? Well it was likely the PCs were after information on his masters plans, with all the other flunkies dead he was the only prisoner they could take back for interrogation. He was forthright with some local info to save his skin, but held back on more strategic info to retain his value and life.
I give full exp for foes that run away, and you get exp again if you face them again and get them to run away. You also get full exp for taking prisoners, any thing that defeats or overcomes the challenge.
They are enraged with bloodlust (then they may not even know they are losing), they are protecting there home oe women and children (if they care about such), running away from battle is against some deep sense of honor, against their religion by Crom, death is better than your BBEG boss making an example of you as a deserter, your body is likely to be recovered and you'll be raised, etc. Those are mostly "bad guy" motivations for standing their ground to the death.
Sometimes they surrender instead if they feel they may be given quarter or they are too valauble alive. On the latter they will cetainly explain this while defednding themselves and I've had one evil captain level leader intentionally wasted his last few ogres against the PCs why? Well it was likely the PCs were after information on his masters plans, with all the other flunkies dead he was the only prisoner they could take back for interrogation. He was forthright with some local info to save his skin, but held back on more strategic info to retain his value and life.
I give full exp for foes that run away, and you get exp again if you face them again and get them to run away. You also get full exp for taking prisoners, any thing that defeats or overcomes the challenge.
Lots of running away happens on both sides. I don't really pay attention to CR when I run D&D, and prefer largish groups... usually one side, either the PCs or the other guys, will realize that they're outclassed and make some kind of break for it. Fights also tend to be scattered around large areas, rather than both forces forming up and clashing en masse, so sometimes parts of both sides decide to retreat.
It's hectic and fun. Balanced encounters are overrated.
It's hectic and fun. Balanced encounters are overrated.
Man in the Funny Hat
Hero
As often as I want or need them to. I couldn't tell you what that averages out to as I don't keep score. Keeping score would be against my principles anyway. Intelligent opponents are inclined to flee if it looks like they've lost any real choice - and yet some will then take the attitude of "I'll take as many of the PC SOB's with me as I can." But then they also need to have TIME to recognize that their situation is hopeless. If the fight is going to be 4 rounds from start to finish few opponents are going to size up the situation fast enough to recognize flight as their only real hope. If the fight is going to go 10 rounds and the bad guys are at 50% losses on round 4 or 5 then it's far more likely for them to choose flight.
Even stupid monsters are seldom MINDLESS. Animal instincts will still occasionally tell dumb, violent brutes that they ARE going to die and that running is better for them.
And then sometimes they will fight to the death because I just want to inflict as much damage on the PC's as I can to sap their strength a little more for the next fight. Sometimes they'll be overly timid if early in the encounter it starts shaping up as more of a fight than I feel like running at the moment. If it looks like the outcome is a foregone conclusion and will have little or no knock-on effects then I don't have a problem cutting it short either by simply declaring the PC's the winner or trying to have the opponents flee.
In many ways it's a complex decision making process that includes meta-game elements. It is the reason that I am strongly opposed to the idea of morale rolls - it would presume to make BETTER decisions than I for such things.
Even stupid monsters are seldom MINDLESS. Animal instincts will still occasionally tell dumb, violent brutes that they ARE going to die and that running is better for them.
And then sometimes they will fight to the death because I just want to inflict as much damage on the PC's as I can to sap their strength a little more for the next fight. Sometimes they'll be overly timid if early in the encounter it starts shaping up as more of a fight than I feel like running at the moment. If it looks like the outcome is a foregone conclusion and will have little or no knock-on effects then I don't have a problem cutting it short either by simply declaring the PC's the winner or trying to have the opponents flee.
In many ways it's a complex decision making process that includes meta-game elements. It is the reason that I am strongly opposed to the idea of morale rolls - it would presume to make BETTER decisions than I for such things.
Similar Threads
