"Run away! Run away!" ... what if they don't?

[delericho]

Now this is not a universal opinion, but some DMs (and I'm one of them) believe that not all encounters should be balanced. Once in a while your party should encounter bandits and crush them, but also once in a while the party should encounter a monster that is just *too much*. The encounter isn't a "fight the monster!" challenge, it's a "hot damn, *three* fire giants? Let's get the hell outta here!" challenge.

I don't believe that the DM should be determining what the PCs should do before the encounter. Sure, standing and fighting against impossible odds is a poor choice... but it's the players' choice.

(Also, of course, they could run away... but they could also negotiate, sneak past, or some up with some other clever solution.)

BUT... what if they don't?

TPK.

If the odds really are that extreme, and they choose to fight, then let the dice lie as they fall. If that's the end of the campaign, so be it - roll new characters and start over.

Of course, they could get really lucky, carve out the win... and have a story that will last the players for decades. And that's even better.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

My players encounter monsters as in the adventure path, regardless of whether they can beat them or not. If they are facing strong enemies I telegraph that for them a bit, but knowing my group, they'll fight anyway.

Usually it's only during combat they start to feel like running might be a better option. I don't really go easy on them, but they definitely can come up with plans to make their escape easier. They might fail horribly and then it's TPK. Depending on the enemy they might not be killed but instead taken prisoner, though. It all depends on the situation and the dice rolls (if they fail their last death saving throw because the villain can stabilize them to take them prisoner, then they are really dead).

Also in case of TPK, I also am fairly flexible. If one of my players says he is really attached to his character and doesn't want to create a new one, I might make him wake up at the closest location that's controlled by his faction. It makes sense that an agent with higher renown may be revived by his faction, shall the corpse be found in time, after all.

So yeah, I don't bend the rules at all, but I still consider player wishes within reason.

 

[Lanefan]

I think it is a mistake to design an encounter in such a way that fleeing is the only option. I don't think encounters should be scripted like that. If you set up an encounter where the players must flee the dragon, they WILL fight it. I guarantee it.

There's (usually) other options beyond fight or flee, though, of which parlay or negotiation or other non-violent communication is the most obvious.

Low-level party walk into a big cave, turn a corner, and there's a huge-mongous red dragon in front of them ready to unleash fiery hell. Sure they can try to fight it, in which case all of them will die; sure they can try to flee, in which case only most of them will die; but what is there to lose by trying to talk to it? (hint: nothing!)

Now if it was 4 mindless iron golems instead of a dragon then yeah, it's fight or flight time...but fleeing in this case has a far better chance as golems don't usually have deadly cave-filling brerath weapons...

Lanefan

 

[werecorpse]

Here's some stuff I tend to use when I expect the party to run. Everyone makes mistakes - players and GM's - and I would rather my players did stuff and got it wrong than were super cautious

1) have the enemy be not just too powerful but way way way too powerful. So 3 fire giants v a 7th level party they might think it's a winnable fight. They may not be clear as to the power of the enemy. I have used a beholder v a 2nd level party, a lich v a 4th level party.

2) have the bad guys not take the fight seriously or have a goal other than kill the players: the beholder and its Minotaur servant wanted to take an NPC prisoner, the lich wanted an old spellbook. Have one of the fire Giants say loudly in common "I bet you a silver groat you can't hit the fat blue one with your eyes closed" then one of the others throws a rock with disadvantage at the PC wizard while the other two laugh. Have one giant scoop up the most obstreperous PC and toss him into a stream 300 feet away and then shout "nailed it, 3 points" and have another say "My Turn"

3) if the fight has to happen have a couple of bacon saving options. My favourites are
A) a rival adventuring party shows up and saves the party mid fight - they'll hate that.
B) one of the bad guys sees an opportunity to kill his rival and backstabs his ally - they are evil right?
C) a bad guy snatches up an unconscious ally and threatens to twist his head off unless a ransom is paid - making it clear that negotiation is an option
D) a bad guys potion gies wrong polymorphing it into a vicious beast (T-Rex, Bullette whatever) that attacks anything
E) a bigger fish is attracted to the fight and grabs a bad guy snack (Dragon, Titan, Kraken) before flying away.

With number 3 I will tell the players that that was one of their 3 get out of jail encounter modifiers so they know on a metagame level that they got bailed out and that it won't always happen

 

[jgsugden]

D&D is an RPG... a role playing game. The characters play a role in a story. Make it a good story.

If I am dropping Fire Giants in front of the PCs when they can't handle them, there is a reason. If there is a reason, I'll set it up. While I set it up I will include warning signs of the incredible difficulty. For example, if the PCs just spent a few rounds cutting down a beater monster that had a good amount of HPs, I might have the PCs observe the giants take down a similar monster real fast.

However, there are few reasons for me to put a foe into the game that will be likely to overwhelm the PCs in a fight. They're the heroes. Making them feel insiginificant on a regular basis doesn't make them feel like heroes. It makes them feel like they're being bullied.

Then, if Ido set it up, regardless of what the PCs decide to do, I am looking to make it a great story. It might be the great ending... it might be a horrid learning moment where allies are lost... but if I felt a need to put it in the game, there is astory to be told.

 

[Caliburn101]

If they don't take reasonable hints, and the situation is clearly very bad, and they know there is no cavalry to save them, then allow the encounter to proceed to character deaths until they run.

CR and Threat Level and all these concepts were introduced by D&D, and many people who have only played D&D seem to think that all encounters must be balanced.

There are so, so many fantasy rpg's (and ones of other genres) where balancing rules are a hand-waive or simply not present at all. They treat the GM like they are competent to create encounters themselves without the handholding.

That said, CR etc. is useful - but it is just one tool in the GM's kit, and should not be taken for granted by players.

A gameworld (not a single dungeon or challenge type game - these do of course need to be balanced) should have lots of dangerous stuff in it characters cannot defeat, and it should not gate them off from those if they want to interact with them. There can be in-game warnings from NPCs, History/Lore checks, local legends sang about by Bards, or just local knowledge that the ruins make mincemeat out of powerful adventurers and are not for the likes of YOU.

In other words plenty of in-game ways for the world to make it clear that 'you shouldn't do the thing'...

As a GM, do yourself a favour and tell your players that your world is more freeform than the CR rules straight-jacket implies, and that whilst most things will be reasonably balanced, there will be times when they are not, and that doing research, scouting, planning, using sound tactics, and when necessary, fleeing, are all VERY good ideas.

Your campaign will be all the better for it.

 

[jasper]

After the TPK, everyone gets to make a knew character that is a close relative of the dead character, and they join together to find out what happened to their missing relatives.

"I am Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die!"

"I am Feldspar Ironbeard, you killed my brother, prepare to die!"

"I am Eris Moonsong, you killed my aunt, prepare to die!"

"I am Timmy Whisperfoot, you killed my cousin, prepare to die!"

BURRRRRRPPPPPPP. I love eating relatives of recent meals replies George Giant.
JUST SAY NO TO PLOT ARMOUR. If you gave them a chance or two to run away. It sucks to be Giant toe jam... Eeeeel I just step into a druid scream Georgia Giant.

 

[jasper]

Dead characters learn no lessons.

You are right said Bob who had died 5 time in "Dead in Thay"

 

[Sacrosanct]

D&D is an RPG... a role playing game. The characters play a role in a story. Make it a good story.

If I am dropping Fire Giants in front of the PCs when they can't handle them, there is a reason. If there is a reason, I'll set it up. While I set it up I will include warning signs of the incredible difficulty. For example, if the PCs just spent a few rounds cutting down a beater monster that had a good amount of HPs, I might have the PCs observe the giants take down a similar monster real fast.

However, there are few reasons for me to put a foe into the game that will be likely to overwhelm the PCs in a fight. They're the heroes. Making them feel insiginificant on a regular basis doesn't make them feel like heroes. It makes them feel like they're being bullied.

Then, if Ido set it up, regardless of what the PCs decide to do, I am looking to make it a great story. It might be the great ending... it might be a horrid learning moment where allies are lost... but if I felt a need to put it in the game, there is astory to be told.

I think this illustrates a difference in play style. To many (such as myself), the PCs do NOT play a role in the story. Not in the way you describe it anyway. You seem to have the story as coming first, then PCs reactions later. For many such as myself, the PCs play a role in the game world. The difference being that the story comes later, based on the PCs actions. They craft the story as they go, and based on what they do. And sometimes, the story doesn't have a happy ending if their choices lead to that. The fire giants could be there for no other reason than they live there in the world, and have nothing to do with any predetermined story. I don't need or want to come up with a reason beforehand of them being there being tied to the campaign story. Ecology, living game world come first.

Some of the best stories playing D&D were created by the players via their PC actions, and not based on a pre-determined story me as the DM was telling, so it's not really wholly on the DM to make it a good story, as you say.

Needless to say, I also disagree with your opinion about rarely putting a foe that will overwhelm the PCs into the game. As you say, they are heroes. Nothing heroic about always knowing you will win. In fact, it kind of runs counter to the whole heroic journey thing. You don't want the PCs to feel bullied, well, I don't think turning the PCs into bullies is any more heroic.

But again, all of this comes down to preference and playstyle I'm assuming.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Dead characters learn no lessons.

Unless they get raised or resurrected. But more importantly, the players could learn the lesson