D&D 5E Is morale used anymore?

[Ovinomancer]

Yep, in nearly every game I run, the party ends up with NPC allies from the small monstrous humanoids sooner or later.

Sometimes it’s just a lone goblin or kobold, but often times it ends up eventually being turned into an in-depth alliance, such as a current group’s Dragonborn Paladin that has two different kobold tribes that consider him to be their protector and chief.

Goblins and kobolds in particular are so cowardly and prone to surrender, and more intrinsically amusing/nonthreatening than some of the larger monstrous humanoids, that I find it happens quite often.

Ooh, that wouldn't work so well in my campaign, where goblins and kobolds aren't the comic relief. Cowardly, yes, but in the 'wait until you're asleep and slit your throat' way rather than the 'funny creatures I can cow into good behavior' way.

 

[MostlyDm]

Oh, sure, they'll definitely slit your throat in your sleep if doing so would benefit them.

I mean, one of the kobold groups had kidnapped an alchemist and were making good headway as raiders, with fairly sophisticated tools and tactics.

But, insidious or not, purely based on appearance they are intrinsically kind of amusing. And, good tactics or no, they're nonthreatening purely by dint of having worse statblocks than most monstrous humanoids. They die quick.

I'd say what inevitably leads to them being good allies is not comic relief, though. Upon reflection, I think another big factor is that I never DM inherently evil NPCs unless they are demons or other extraplanar aligned creatures. Goblins and kobolds have motives, hopes, dreams, etc.

The Dragonborn Paladin can provide them with the tools and resources they were previously acquiring through plunder. He even negotiated a mutually beneficial arrangement between them and the local city guards. It leads to less dead kobolds, and better fed kobold matrons. I couldn't see any reason they wouldn't leap at the opportunity, other than "no, because they are inherently evil."

 

[Sacrosanct]

Oh, sure, they'll definitely slit your throat in your sleep if doing so would benefit them.

I mean, one of the kobold groups had kidnapped an alchemist and were making good headway as raiders, with fairly sophisticated tools and tactics.

But, insidious or not, purely based on appearance they are intrinsically kind of amusing. And, good tactics or no, they're nonthreatening purely by dint of having worse statblocks than most monstrous humanoids. They die quick.

I'd say what inevitably leads to them being good allies is not comic relief, though. Upon reflection, I think another big factor is that I never DM inherently evil NPCs unless they are demons or other extraplanar aligned creatures. Goblins and kobolds have motives, hopes, dreams, etc.

The Dragonborn Paladin can provide them with the tools and resources they were previously acquiring through plunder. He even negotiated a mutually beneficial arrangement between them and the local city guards. It leads to less dead kobolds, and better fed kobold matrons. I couldn't see any reason they wouldn't leap at the opportunity, other than "no, because they are inherently evil."

 

[Ovinomancer]

Oh, sure, they'll definitely slit your throat in your sleep if doing so would benefit them.

I mean, one of the kobold groups had kidnapped an alchemist and were making good headway as raiders, with fairly sophisticated tools and tactics.

But, insidious or not, purely based on appearance they are intrinsically kind of amusing. And, good tactics or no, they're nonthreatening purely by dint of having worse statblocks than most monstrous humanoids. They die quick.

I'd say what inevitably leads to them being good allies is not comic relief, though. Upon reflection, I think another big factor is that I never DM inherently evil NPCs unless they are demons or other extraplanar aligned creatures. Goblins and kobolds have motives, hopes, dreams, etc.

The Dragonborn Paladin can provide them with the tools and resources they were previously acquiring through plunder. He even negotiated a mutually beneficial arrangement between them and the local city guards. It leads to less dead kobolds, and better fed kobold matrons. I couldn't see any reason they wouldn't leap at the opportunity, other than "no, because they are inherently evil."

In my games, the kobolds would also love to make that deal, and would, but it would be to grow the size of the tribe as much as possible so that the stronger races can't subjugate them anymore. My kobolds hate being weak, and will do anything it takes, including pretend to be weak and subservient, to undermine stronger creatures and humble them. This is their cultural outlook -- being kept would rankle them endlessly, but they will to pretend to be kept to increase their numbers and capability. Kobolds individually are weak. Kobolds attacking at night, with forged armor and weapons, in waves of 100s, are terrifying. And their goal is to burn and break towns and cities, to prevent the other races from ever having enough strength to lord it over the kobolds. Now, you can call that evil, and I'm sure it is so in a number of contexts, but that's how my kobolds think.

My goblins are a bit more mercenary, though, and tend to make deals that benefit the individual, even at the expense of the tribe.

 

[Stormdale]

I grew up on AD&D and 1E and 2E morale for monsters so my players have come to expect monsters using morale- depends on the monsters, its alignment and situation (mindless undead for example don’t run away, vampires often will), and when combats are going badly for them they are concentrating on leader types and once the BBEG (or a major lieutenant) goes down they are reminding me about morale rules- surely they must be scared at seeing how easily we’ve taken down their boss? “You are next scum!” Sometimes pleasing/arguing for a morale check. I evaluate the situation, assign a DC and roll. I still chuckle at how focused my players get in these situations knowing that they’ve another round of combat ahead if I pass the roll (especially when they are also faring badly and low on hps- it can sometimes almost become a game of bluff.)

Not only is running a viable tactic but in doing so it means that the alarm can be raised and all hell break loose so adds further tactical complications to the game.

Best way to become a recurring villain IMO is to run away! But yes, in 5E often you need to run while still on reasonable hps- or have a few underlings to cover your escape. My group are currently playing through parts of Princes of the Apocalyse (mashed together with bits of the original T1 and the 3E RTTToEE and other stuff) and have had about 3-4 run ins with Windharrow (female in my game) but each time she has escaped to fight another day. Last week’s game the party had, for the second time, captured Feathergale Spire- from Windharrow who I’d added to the tower as Thurl’s lover as my 5 player party are 5th -6th level. First time they took it (several months ago) Thurl escaped with his life but after they party abandoned it the cult reclaimed the tower. This time he went down and when he did the morale of the rest of his knights broke and Windharrow and the remaining Feathergale Knights fled the spire. The party tried really really hard to kill her before she got away but failed- though they did get one of the 3 remaining knights.

The party then attacked the Howling Hatred Temple but retreated back to Feathergale spire after another run in with Windharrow and the cultists. Their plan to rest up somewhere safe overnight so Windharrow and some of the senior cultists counterattacked in the middle of the night. There was another epic battle and when it turned against her Windharrow again fled but this time just as she was getting out of range the party (was the last person’s initiative and she was next and would be out of range of everybody so safe) the wizard managed to bring her down with a fireball at max range due to her failing her save (thanks mainly to the wizard using a portent dice to ensure she failed her save!) The sense of satisfaction around the table and highfives as players really felt they’d earned their victory (they had, I was trying every trick in the book to get her way to fight another day) made the encounter truly memorable and is what makes this game great. Again it was much more satisfying because she hadn’t hung round to get killed 3 rounds earlier!

It also would have been boring if the week before she’d simply fought to the death and been a very slight speed hump in the adventure. Sometimes running away is the right option and advances the story- but I let the situation (and if necessary assign a DC and roll the dice) determine if my NPCs/ monsters hang round to be mopped up or not, adds to the sense of versmilitude to the game IMO.

Stormdale

 

[Shiroiken]

I've been working on a better Morale mechanic for 5E. I don't like tying the roll to an ability score, unless it's the leader's Charisma. It's still in the works, but the general gist is:

A creature rolls a Moral Check when each of the following happens:
The first time it takes damage from a Vulnrability (or damage that prevents Regeneration)
The first time it's reduced to 50% of Max HP
When it's leader (if any) becomes incapacitated or flees
Each round that the creature's side suffers a casualty without inflicting one (still thinking about this one)

Morale Check - Roll 1d20 vs. DC: 10 (toying with DC: 8)
Modifiers:
-1 for each Ally Incapacitated or Fled
-2 if creatures is wounded, but not down to 50% of max HP
-5 if creature is wounded to 50% of max HP or less
+1 for every 2 enemies Incapacitated or fled (maybe 1:1, not sure)
+ Leader's Charisma Modifier
Disadvantage if Leader is Incapacitated or Fled
Advantage if defending Lair

 

[MostlyDm]

I've been working on a better Morale mechanic for 5E. I don't like tying the roll to an ability score, unless it's the leader's Charisma. It's still in the works, but the general gist is:

A creature rolls a Moral Check when each of the following happens:
The first time it takes damage from a Vulnrability (or damage that prevents Regeneration)
The first time it's reduced to 50% of Max HP
When it's leader (if any) becomes incapacitated or flees
Each round that the creature's side suffers a casualty without inflicting one (still thinking about this one)

Morale Check - Roll 1d20 vs. DC: 10 (toying with DC: 8)
Modifiers:
-1 for each Ally Incapacitated or Fled
-2 if creatures is wounded, but not down to 50% of max HP
-5 if creature is wounded to 50% of max HP or less
+1 for every 2 enemies Incapacitated or fled (maybe 1:1, not sure)
+ Leader's Charisma Modifier
Disadvantage if Leader is Incapacitated or Fled
Advantage if defending Lair

Seems cool, except for the part where you roll a check for individual monsters at multiple break points.

That could easily add dozens of rolls to a decently sized fight. Doesn't it bog things down a bit?

 

[Gadget]

Well, moral has been largely excised from D&D for several editions now, so I doubt many people are using the optional variant in the DMG. It can largely be summed up by having the DM play the monsters realistically, however you define that. I'm not sure having monsters make a WIS ST at certain times is worth the added complexity, but it would be useful on occasion. I would be tempted to make it a CHR ST, though.

 

[MostlyDm]

In my games, the kobolds would also love to make that deal, and would, but it would be to grow the size of the tribe as much as possible so that the stronger races can't subjugate them anymore. My kobolds hate being weak, and will do anything it takes, including pretend to be weak and subservient, to undermine stronger creatures and humble them. This is their cultural outlook -- being kept would rankle them endlessly, but they will to pretend to be kept to increase their numbers and capability. Kobolds individually are weak. Kobolds attacking at night, with forged armor and weapons, in waves of 100s, are terrifying. And their goal is to burn and break towns and cities, to prevent the other races from ever having enough strength to lord it over the kobolds. Now, you can call that evil, and I'm sure it is so in a number of contexts, but that's how my kobolds think.


My goblins are a bit more mercenary, though, and tend to make deals that benefit the individual, even at the expense of the tribe.

That makes a lot of sense!


I often keep the current D&D lore/flavor of Kobolds revering and idolizing dragons, and generally being perfectly happy to be subservient to them. And I let a little of that spill onto the Dragonborn. And, more recently, onto an actual dragon that is a tentative ally of the party.


But in lieu of the dragon aspect, I think your assessment of their plan is actually pretty spot on. The city in question is pretty egregious (day-to-day affairs run by plutocratic guilds, with the city's overlord being an immensely powerful lich and his many minions, catspaws, secret police, etc.) I bet the Dragonborn would be stoked to try to break it apart with an army of ten thousand kobolds.

 

[Ath-kethin]

When reading through the 5e DMG for the first time, I realized that the lack of a Morale mechanic was a big part of what had bugged me about combat in 3.x (I sat out most of 4e). I was overjoyed to find the optional rule on page 273. It's simple, elegant, easy to remember, and I use it all the time.