D&D 5E Unconscious PC's and smart monsters

[Fanaelialae]

I definitely agree, but when the NPC does that, the NPC is toast, and he probably knows it. They are definitely 100% going to die, probably well inside the next round, because the other PCs are going to absolutely hit them with everything they've got. And the PC in question will probably get hit with Healing Word, so will be back up, on 0 Death Saves (because they auto-reset to 0 when you get up, so even if you get downed immediately again, you're back on 0 saves failed)

This is what I think on GitP they refer to as the "Yoyo", which is very much part of 5E RAW.

Really the only way the players manage to get the PC killed is either:

A) He has 1 death save failed from his current 0 HP status.

or

B) The players manage to do this at the worst possible initiative order, so that a PC causes the NPC to react by the PC's actions, and those actions aren't casting Healing Word or similar, aaaaaaaaand the NPC is also the next person on the initiative order. Given how readying works this would likely mean several PCs has skipped their go or done nothing to annoy the NPC.

In fact, casting Healing Word breaks this entire scenario unless the PC is a death save down!!!

Here's what happens:

0) NPC has PC on 0 HP held, and readies an action to make an attack if the other PCs take any actions or move towards him.

1) The Cleric says "I cast Healing Word..."

2) The NPC gets his readied attack as a Reaction to that, so before it goes off, stabs the PC, who auto-fails 2 death saves. OH NO!

3) The PC gets healed for 1d6+WIS (or whatever) and is back on say, 7 HP, and has ZERO failed death saves.

Even if the NPC clobbers the PC (unlikely because everyone will blow everything to nail him), he's back on 0 HP and 0 failed death saves. And the NPC no longer has a hostage.

Even if the DM says the Healing Word lands before the stab (not a viable interpretation RAW), the NPC stabs the PC down to 0 HP and 0 failed death saves, rather than two failed death saves, so is now in trouble. Kind of the smartest thing for the NPC to do, perversely, is stab the PC immediately, so he's on two failed death saves, then stabilize him (nothing says you can't stabilize enemies!), then threaten him. That's a bit more reliable.


What have we learned here? Healing Word is a very troublesome spell, as literally any spell that can deliver at least 1HP of healing at a distance!

You have that backwards.

PHB pg 193, under Ready:
"When the trigger occurs, you can either take you reaction after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger."

Readied actions always take place AFTER the action that triggered them by RAW.

That said, it actually works against the hostage taker. Healing word give the hostage at least 1 hp. Hostage taker attacks and (assuming he doesn't miss) probably takes the hostage to 0 hp. Now you have 3 failed death saves to go before you need to worry about anything.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You have that backwards.

PHB pg 193, under Ready:
"When the trigger occurs, you can either take you reaction after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger."

Readied actions always take place AFTER the action that triggered them by RAW.

That said, it actually works against the hostage taker. Healing word give the hostage at least 1 hp. Hostage taker attacks and (assuming he doesn't miss) probably takes the hostage to 0 hp. Now you have 3 failed death saves to go before you need to worry about anything.

I did actually include what happens if it was the other way around, but I appreciate the rules-correction! Either way Healing Word breaks a hostage scenario where a PC who has access to it is within 60' of the hostage scenario (assuming the hostage is a PC).

 

[MarkB]

The tricky part is to not make it feel confrontational at the table level. If an NPC does this, it can very easily feel like the DM is saying "Bob, Jane, Timmy, let my NPC get what he wants or I'm going to kill Joe's character."

 

[tommybahama]

You are looking at the fantasy world through a modern lens. A couple of centuries ago men of rank and station still engaged in duals of honor over stupid slights. Even to this day gang bangers (bandits) throw their life away over stupidity.

 

[Asisreo]

Well, what kind of person is the NPC? Aren't they probably a hired thug without any great attachment to the other NPCs? Why would they assume that the PCs are dissimilar?

Turn this around. If the PCs downed and then an NPC, would Lord Badguy McCultleader bargain for the NPC's life? Or even the leader of the the troop of guards? Or the bandit squad leader?

Note: a great many of the "adventurers" out there probably are mercenary thugs for hire. Your PCs are in a game, and need to put some value on the lives of the other PCs to support the overall fun in the game. But the fictional world they live in is high on violence, low on value-of-life, in general.

It depend on that NPC and his thought process. Are they hired thugs? Even if they were just hired thugs, would they still prefer not to have their own team killed? Does that mean that all travelers are also hired thugs?

Sure, any mustache-twirling NPC wouldn't care if minion 8 got his throat slit. But if the party was negotiating with his trusted advisor's life on the line...it still kinda depends, right?

I do, though, find it wholly unrealistic to have NPC's ready to die in a random clearing in the woods for a chance at coins. Regular bandits know they're not getting any split of gold if they're dead.

Now, for the tactics discussion. It's about staying alive, not winning (usually). It doesn't really matter how they go about it as long as it makes sense from a desperation point of view.

If an enemy can't reach the other threats within a turn, they have a spare multiattack, or they're a hungry mindless creature, they'll execute a nearby PC. Hell, undead don't have much priority staying alive than hating on life and Fiends are usually immortal and sadistic enough to sacrifice their material plane time for a new slave in the lower planes.

If an enemy has the option to down another player, they will do that instead of execution. If the enemy isn't particularly blood-thirsty, like a guard, or want slaves, like a grung, they'd probably move on.

I just want fights to make sense. Merely threatening me for coin isn't enough for a perceptible "good" character to kill them off, they're just punks until they draw blood. And if they don't kill, they're just thieves. I don't feel like there's enough roleplay once combat has started and it quickly makes things stale when every opposing NPC has ear muffs to prevent common sense from somehow making it into their thick skulls.

 

[Asisreo]

You are looking at the fantasy world through a modern lens. A couple of centuries ago men of rank and station still engaged in duals of honor over stupid slights. Even to this day gang bangers (bandits) throw their life away over stupidity.

The difference is they're fighting for a cause bigger than themselves. It's selfless, in a way. Random muggers are doing it for themselves. And if you die, what did you die for? Because you were too stupid to know when you've lost?

Also, also. Even if surrendering or hostage taking isn't a perfect strategy, it all depends on the cards you have in your hands. You'll die if you don't try and you'll die if you fail but trying has the chance to live.

 

[Fanaelialae]

The tricky part is to not make it feel confrontational at the table level. If an NPC does this, it can very easily feel like the DM is saying "Bob, Jane, Timmy, let my NPC get what he wants or I'm going to kill Joe's character."

Very much this. It can feel very heavy handed, or even smack of railroading.

I don't think taking hostages has ever worked against any group I've played with. We've always chosen to just take the consequences, even if it meant a TPK.

I think it is because defeat feels bad but surrendering feels worse. If you fought the good fight and lost, you at least have that. If you surrender, you know there's more you could have done. If nothing else, you could have fought to the bitter end.

Many of the enemies in my campaign will take the party hostage, if possible, and try to ransom them back (there's even a bank whose primary purpose is the handling of such negotiations). But they never try to hold a PC hostage against the party. IME, that's a recipe for disaster.

 

[Fanaelialae]

The difference is they're fighting for a cause bigger than themselves. It's selfless, in a way. Random muggers are doing it for themselves. And if you die, what did you die for? Because you were too stupid to know when you've lost?

Also, also. Even if surrendering or hostage taking isn't a perfect strategy, it all depends on the cards you have in your hands. You'll die if you don't try and you'll die if you fail but trying has the chance to live.

NPCs whose morale is broken generally just make a run for it IMC. They frequently don't make it, but sometimes they do.

 

[jasper]

Depending on the module and my mood, the monsters will parley using a mostly dead pc as shield. Some times the pcs parley. Sometimes the pcs parley and then go back on their word. Sometimes Skully gets a new name to display.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Generally speaking, most NPCs and monsters seem much more willing to fight to the death than is probably reasonable. This is at least partly because they exist to be obstacles to the PCs and we often think of them only in that regard.

If you try to actually play NPCs....even unintelligent animals...as actual beings with drives and goals, then things start to look different. Most beings do not want to die.

So play them that way. Think what they want at any point, and then have them act in a way that makes sense. If that means killing a downed enemy rather than attacking someone who’s still on their feet and actively trying to kill the NPC, then so be it. Same with taking a hostage, or any similar action. Have the NPC make decisions based on their goals and how they can achieve those goals.

As for the question of damage to a hostage or similar....the rules give the DM leeway in that the dice are only needed if there is doubt about the outcome. A NPC with a dagger to an unconscious PC’s throat? There’s no doubt in my mind what would happen. The only question seems to be if someone else can do something before the NPC can act.