How to enable Running Away

[howandwhy99]

I was so inspired I made a list of my own:

Have the opponents run away when morale breaks.

Have the opponents take prisoners and call for surrender.

Make a comprehensible world within which the players can judge the opposition.
If a monster can't talk to you, it makes it harder to negotiate. If a creature is fighting from starvation or protecting its young (usually in its lair), this affects morale.

Rate monsters based upon their movement speed and movement types.
This includes transportation magics.

Assign NPCs goals and priorities.
Monsters will attempt to expand their territory, but the majority only attack to defend it and leave off when a threat has left. If staying alive is a higher priority, then they will leave behind all sorts of treasure.

Killing and attacking to the death are uncommon.
Most creatures don't want to die, but will kill to survive. If the food (treasure) is costing more than it's worth, than morale will likely break and the creatures will run. Sometimes monsters aren't looking to eat you anyways, but enslave you or just steal your stuff when you aren't looking.

 

[howandwhy99]

What's more likely:

• NPCs will make an initial run to where the attack came from OR run away (fight or flight response).
• If the immediate threat is gone (out of site/gun range), you'l remain vigilant but return to your rally point.
• Then the group will be on high alert, maybe form a patrol to seek out the threat specifically, or at least patrol the main area more alertly.
• NPCs should remain on high alert for several days at least, being a bit jumpy.
• NPCs will also tend to the wounded and remove any dead bodies from the main living area.

I think the counter to player abuse of hit-n-run tactics is that each subsequent time they do it to a force, the enemy will be more watchful and ready for it. making sneaking harder, and generally causing the NPCs to group up more (such that instead of facing 1 dungeon room of orcs at a time, ALL of the orcs on the floor will be waiting for the party, possibly in their own ambush).

This reminds me of playing B2's Chaos Caves so much.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

There's probably been other threads on the topic. Hopefully this one is better..

Given the other thread about clues for when the PCs are out-gunned, it seems like a thread on ideas for enabling running away would be handy.

I'd like to solve the problem from a system agnostic approach. It's not about Running Away being broken. It's about running encounters where Running Away can be feasible.

My premise is that PCs don't run away because they don't think it will work.

My proposal is that GMs should design encounters so Running Away could be feasible.

Here's the ideas I have thus far:

Make it possible to know the strength of the opposition
Whether you just tell the PCs, give them a clue, or hope they think to investigate first, you need to know what in-game signs there are of the encounter's challenge compared to the party. Big muscles, glowing weapons, signs of high damage output, etc. If you don't, then how would the party ever know if they should avoid this encounter or not.

In new gaming parlance, this is called "railroading". (I'm not saying it's always a bad idea.) :/ It also seems like a waste of a DM's time. It's pretty rare to put work into creating a powerful NPC, and then expect your PCs to never face them.

Supply some chokepoints, barricades and doors
As a GM, you know when an encounter is tougher than the party. Examine the set pieces around the area and add some scenery to enable a fallback point that the party could retreat through and slow the enemy down enough to escape. If the map doesn't make escape feasible, the PCs aren't going to bother trying.

I like this idea. Of course, that stuff should be in every encounter, whether PCs can run away or not.

Use realistic motivations for monsters that don't require pursuit
In the real world, hostile animals do not pursue intruders forever. Once they leave their immediate area, they shake their paw angrily, roar, and go back home. Except for police, most people don't chase after an intruder either. There's too much risk in following the enemy, as you don't know if they had reinforcements hiding around the next corner. It's more probable that NPCs will pursue to a certain boundary, then fall back, regroup and decide if they need to posse up with a proper pursuit effort. Either way, this is the break the PCs are hoping for when they runaway from the initial encounter.

In a real-life military conflict, the kind fought before guns that is, most deaths occurred during the retreat. PCs rarely run unless they've been smacked down, and once the bad guys see bleeding, weakened, spell-depleted PCs run away, they're thinking of plot reasons to kill them, or loot. The PCs need to run away really far before the bad guys give up.

On a similar note, if the losing side doesn't retreat until they've lost a few members, they're weaker and the winners are incentivized to attack. It doesn't help that, unlike mercenaries or soldiers, PCs are much more willing to risk their lives (they wouldn't be adventurers if they wouldn't) and so aren't going to back down because there's a chance they could get hurt as they pursue. The same would apply to at least some opponents.

I'm picturing a group of (fairly weak) goblins who managed to defeat PCs. They had the numbers, or arrows, or (worse) both! There's little incentive for the goblins to not just finish off their opponents unless the PCs have demonstrated some very specific abilities (eg lots of flaming cloaks). And even then... arrows.

There's, of course, a risk of falling into another encounter. This risk is pretty high in a dungeon, but IMO if the battle is making that much noise, perhaps one of the NPCs should have retreated to summon reinforcements. As for the villains, it's pretty rare that the PCs have brought (competent) backup. The risks for following them are low. (Unless the PCs have taken control of traps further back, which is pretty cool, and also sometimes funny.)

Tell your players how the world works
Let them know that not all encounters are level appropriate. Let them know that some encounters are much stronger and that they should be careful, and be prepared to runaway. Also let them know the thinking on why most NPCs will chase to get them out of the immediate territory, but not give endless pursuit.

Maybe we have different ideas of what counts as "immediate" territory, but I think bad guys will usually pursue the PCs for a few minutes.

If the "bad guys" (who might not really be bad guys, of course) are guards protecting a specific point (such as towers with arrow slits), it makes sense not to pursue. However, villains will usually try to kill the PCs. After all, how often do PCs let villains go? If you've won a victory over hard opponents, you're going to want to avoid the possibility of losing to them next time.

I think it's impossible to divorce the system from the running away scenarios, though. Many game systems have poorly-written (or none!) chase rules. If PCs or villains start running away, it's easy to stop them. It can be frustrating to make running away possible.

Here's an example that occurred a few months ago in a Pathfinder game I'm in. Our PCs hid a catapult in the forest near a bandit-occupied fortress. We intended to use the catapult as a distraction when we attacked. We made a good Stealth check to hide it, but it's size penalty gave it a middling result. A few elven bandit scouts barely spotted it (I think they rolled a 17+ natural on their Spot/Perception checks), and while we were a distance away, they attacked.

We arrived as they were trying to destroy our catapult and kill the crews. There were three elves, and in a few rounds there was one, trying to flee. He had great Stealth and a slight speed boost, so the DM wanted him to get away. We were having none of that.

My druid PC has good Survival and Perception, and could cast Longstrider. He could use an ability to give him low-light vision and Scent (a weaker Wildshape ability, it only lasted 1 minute). His animal companion, a small bear, had speed 40 feet (at least as fast as the elf), low-light vision, and Scent. When you're attempting to use Stealth, you move at half speed or you take penalties. When you track someone, you move at half speed or take penalties. So a slow-moving chase went on. The rules were inadequate for the situation, but all the advantages laid with my PC, and since the rest of the party was following, it didn't matter if the elf could (somehow) ambush my PC and hit him with a few arrows. As soon as he broke Stealth to attack, he was dead. So we just followed him until he realized what would happen. He attacked. He died.

 

[Janx]

In new gaming parlance, this is called "railroading". (I'm not saying it's always a bad idea.) :/ It also seems like a waste of a DM's time. It's pretty rare to put work into creating a powerful NPC, and then expect your PCs to never face them.

I'm not sure this was under the right item for "know what indicators exist to describe the power level difference" as being railroading. Railroading is the GM making the PCs do what he wants regardless of what the players want. This item is about knowing an answer before the PCs ask so you don't have the problem of not even having an answer.

You're other points all look like fine and are reasonable counterpoints.

One way to consider my proposals is that if you want the PCs to be able to feasibly run away, you need to emphasize things that enable that, and de-emphasize things that disable that.

You've got a great line of logic on why running away won't work. If you stick with that, you will defeat the objective of enabling running away, which isn't useful to this thread (and in fact, I think GMs have the whole running away is a useless strategy down).

 

[Mishihari Lord]

Here's an idea I've been thinking about. Losing hit points slowly reduces your attack abilities, but doesn't reduce your abilities to run away. Frex a global -1 on every roll for each 10 hp lost.

This has one big drawback for me: from a simulationist point of view it doesn't make sense. If you're hurt then logically it should be harder to run. I'm pretty solidly of a simulationist mindset.

From a gamist point of view it seems it would accomplish exactly what I want it to. Eventually continuing to fight becomes futile, but running away is still feasible and very attractive.

 

[Derren]

Let's pretend we're talking about my game and I want to make sure that as a DM, I verified there was a solution to the problem of a fast monster. The players are free to look for it and use it, but it's my job to make sure it is "possible".

Some monsters are faster than the party. What practical reasons besides what i've already outlined keep them from pursuing forever?

What practical ways would enable the party to thwart a pursuit by a fast monster?

Imo the DMys job is to create the gaming world, not to unsure that every tactical maneuver is always possible. If the fight happens in a location where running away is hard, then the PCs have to take care to not bite off more than they can chew.
So if the PCs want to eventually run away they should invest in items or magic which helps them to do that.
3E: Caltdrops, Smokesticks, Expeditious Retreat, Sleet Storm, Wall spells, Rock to Mud, Invisibility potions, etc.
Running away from flying enemies (dragons) or even Demons is of course harder. It is also a good idea to scout the area to know good escape routes.

All this are things the PCs should do. The DM is not required to always provide a visible way of escape, especially when the PCs don't do any preparations themselves.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

This is an interesting topic and I have definitely seen a reluctance to flee from almost the entirety of the player-base I've gamed with as a player or GM.

I will say that, as a player, an exit strategy is the first thing I look for when encountering hostiles. Unfortunately, getting the rest of the party to retreat is nigh impossible. I almost fled, once...because I was the only player whose character was still standing...but, one final shot dropped the last opponent and I didn't have to flee.

I think that the best advice is to let all players know if they are playing in a setting where all encounters should be presumed appropriate or if they are in a setting where their character could very well walk into a buzzsaw. Other than doing that, it is up to the players. If they want to play fearless characters, it's not my job to prevent it.

 

[Janx]

Imo the DMys job is to create the gaming world, not to unsure that every tactical maneuver is always possible. If the fight happens in a location where running away is hard, then the PCs have to take care to not bite off more than they can chew.
So if the PCs want to eventually run away they should invest in items or magic which helps them to do that.
3E: Caltdrops, Smokesticks, Expeditious Retreat, Sleet Storm, Wall spells, Rock to Mud, Invisibility potions, etc.
Running away from flying enemies (dragons) or even Demons is of course harder. It is also a good idea to scout the area to know good escape routes.

All this are things the PCs should do. The DM is not required to always provide a visible way of escape, especially when the PCs don't do any preparations themselves.

Your way has already been done. PCs don't run away.

And actually, a DM should pause to check that each encounter DOES have multiple options, lest he write himself a railroad to hell.

Furthermore, the GM verifying that "yup, if the PCs had caltrops or smokesticks, they could retreat" is not the same as the GM handing the PCs smokesticks and caltrops and saying, "use these, now." A GM should also actually make sure it is possible for a PC to get those things.

A possibility check is not the same as giving it away to the PCs. Its making sure you've considered it.

 

[Derren]

Your way has already been done. PCs don't run away.

Which is in my eyes not a problem the DM has to address. If the players don't let the PCs run away, even when facing overwhelming odds, it is their decision.

And actually, a DM should pause to check that each encounter DOES have multiple options, lest he write himself a railroad to hell.

Not every encounter does need to have multiple escape routes. Imo the DM should make sure that the location where the encounter happens fits into to world and let the PCs figure out how to escape. Some locations will naturally have more and better escape routes than other. Thats just another challenge the PCs have to deal with.

Furthermore, the GM verifying that "yup, if the PCs had caltrops or smokesticks, they could retreat" is not the same as the GM handing the PCs smokesticks and caltrops and saying, "use these, now." A GM should also actually make sure it is possible for a PC to get those things.

A possibility check is not the same as giving it away to the PCs. Its making sure you've considered it.

Why should the DM check if the PCs have bought items to help them escape? If the PCs run away and wath items to use for it is completely in the hands of the players and imo the DM should not make any changes depending on the PCs having items to help them escape or not.
And if those items are available depends on the setting and location.

Also, what would you do in the case the PCs don't have those items?

 

[rogueattorney]

The only time I've seen players stop running away is when they've been playing with the DM-safety-net for so long that they've stopped even considering whether their pc might die in combat.