D&D 5E Melee combat on the run

[iserith]

Also according to the DMG chase rules, the chase is over when the quarry is caught.

Depending how you define "caught," which seems open to interpretation to me.

 

[Ristamar]

Also according to the DMG chase rules, the chase is over when the quarry is caught.

If I recall correctly, the rules don't define what "caught" means, leaving it up DM interpretation (i.e. the DM sets the win condition).

 

[Prakriti]

Also according to the DMG chase rules, the chase is over when the quarry is caught.

Not quite. The chase ends when the pursuers are close enough to the quarry to catch it. They don't actually need to catch it for the chase to end. They just need to get within 5 ft. of it (or 10 ft. if they have a longer reach, I guess).

Your point stands, though, and I can see the logic in it now.

 

[Todd Roybark]

So to broaden the discussion, do people enjoy the Chase rules?

I’ve used the Chase ruleset, 3 times now in 5 years.

I stand by my characterization of the Chase rules as “Serviceable”.

The ruleset functions, is a brief change of pace from the ‘normal’ rules, but has never elicited squeals of enjoyment from players.

 

[Ristamar]

Not quite. The chase ends when the pursuers are close enough to the quarry to catch it. They don't actually need to catch it for the chase to end. They just need to get within 5 ft. of it (or 10 ft. if they have a longer reach, I guess).

Your point stands, though, and I can see the logic in it now.

It is strange that the revised Opportunity Attack rule for a chase would seem to be completely negated by this outcome. Not a dispute (I don't have the rules nearby), just an observation.

 

[iserith]

So to broaden the discussion, do people enjoy the Chase rules?

I’ve used the Chase ruleset, 3 times now in 5 years.

I stand by my characterization of the Chase rules as “Serviceable”.

The ruleset functions, is a brief change of pace from the ‘normal’ rules, but has never elicited squeals of enjoyment from players.

I agree they are serviceable as I mention early in the thread and I tweak them here and there. Chiefly that's around reducing the number of rolls for Complications and making sure there's no prescribed way to deal with them, preferring to leave that to the players to decide for themselves.

For my regular players, chases come up now and again and they're just a normal part of the game. For a lot of the pickup players I run for, Inspiration and Chases are among the best specific feedback I get. Almost no DMs do these things in their experience so they really like it.

 

[Prakriti]

It is strange that the revised Opportunity Attack rule for a chase would seem to be completely negated by this outcome. Not a dispute (I don't have the rules nearby), just an observation.

That was my first thought as well. But I can think of a few rare cases where the lack of opportunity attacks might be relevant. Not everyone pursuing a quarry might be on the same "team," for example. It might be a case of A vs. B vs. C, where C is fleeing, and both A (the PC party) and B (a party of orcs) are chasing; in which case, A and B don't get opportunity attacks on each other during the chase.

 

[Prakriti]

So to broaden the discussion, do people enjoy the Chase rules?

I’ve used the Chase ruleset, 3 times now in 5 years.

I stand by my characterization of the Chase rules as “Serviceable”.

The ruleset functions, is a brief change of pace from the ‘normal’ rules, but has never elicited squeals of enjoyment from players.

They don't do anything for me, which is why I've never chosen to use them. In most of the would-be chases I've run, there was nothing at stake, and scenes with nothing at stake are boring. The way I see it, I have two options in handling a boring scene as a DM:

1. Make it interesting (by adding stakes and complications)
2. Move on quickly

Personally, I've always opted for #2 when it comes to chases. I don't enjoy shopkeeping or pointless killing in my games ("tHe gObLin is gEtTinG aWaY! We hAve to kiLL iT!"), so I de-emphasize those things in my games. That doesn't mean the players can't engage in those activities; it just means that I'm not going to waste any more game-time on them than I need to. So a whole "chase scene" might look something like this in my games:

Player: "I chase down the last goblin and kill it!"
Me: rolls dice "You succeed. The goblin now lies dead at your feet. Moving on..."

 

[pemerton]

I have two issues with that post. First, I don’t think we’re talking about opportunity attacks that would only occur because of segmented turn structure. And second, I think the combat rules handle this situation just fine. The rules serve the DM, sure, but as a player, I wouldn’t be happy with a DM that used that as an excuse to rob my character of opportunity attacks.

It doesn’t necessarily do you any good. It doesn’t “win” the fight for you. But you don’t have to stop to attack, so no, the quarry doesn’t gain any ground thereby. It is within your reach and will incur an opportunity attack if it attempts to leave by continuing to run. In situations like this, it’s usually better to stand and fight, isn’t it? I think that’s why we have a rule for opportunity attacks.

My 5e-fu is not all that strong, but I just wanted to try and clarify some of this. (Using the combat framework, not the chase framework.)

If T is in melee with P, and then decides to flee, I understand where the initial OA comes from. (Assuming that T has not also Disengaged because T already attacked.) If P then closes with T (and has sufficient movement to do so without Dashing) then the melee is back on. After this initial exchnage, T could then either Disengage and move, in which case there are no OAs but its rinse/repeat and T will be subject to ongoing attacks without being able to hit back; or T could Dash and move, take another hit of OAs, and then (assuming movement rates are the same) pull away by continuing to Dash. In this latter case if P Dashes and moves then P can keep up with T but won't be able to attack because Dashing instead.

So after the initial exchange, in which T suffers an OA, T's options seem to be either soak one attack per round while Disengaging and moving, or soak double attacks (normal + OA) but then evade melee attacks by Dashing and moving.

Have I got that right?

 

[Quickleaf]

Here's what I've learned to do (usually) when transitioning from combat to a chase.

The monster moves away (possibly Dashing or possibly using an Attack, depending on circumstances), and I signal that it looks like it's trying to flee. If it provokes opportunity attacks, we resolve those. On its following turn, if the monster is still standing, I move its full speed and take the Dash action. If it completes this movement (or sometimes if it moves off the map, depending), then it has fled.

One of the necessary early conditions for a thrilling chase is that the pursuers (in this case the PCs) do not have line of sight to the prey (the monster). This might be terrain like twisting alleyways or thick woods, invisibility, fog/heavy rain, etc.

As soon as the monster has successfully fled, I inform the PCs that they've lost sight of it.

Then I use these chase rules to resolve the chase: 5E - Making Chase Rules... that actually do what they're supposed to!