D&D General Why are we fighting?

[Oofta]

Folks have complained mightily about resource management. It’s a boring useless part of the game.

The social part is boring is broken. It only includes a few kinds of characters.

Speaking of which, “martials” just suck. They are no fun and cannot do anything.

Exploration is dull and broken. Finally—finally! We know combat sucks too!

I kid, I kid. Mostly.

My DMs turn up the heat. We are way into combat. It’s usually hard fought victories. Not always but often. If combat is risky or I cannot just tell it will be easy, I think it’s more engaging.

For crying out loud—-how long are most people’s combats? Make them a reasonable length with some risk. Our sure too wins are typically pretty quick.

Saturday we played a string of combats—-there was time pressure in stopping a seal from being broken. We prevailed but the end monster could do almost 100 damage which would down/kill any of us. As such, I felt appropriately engaged.

Maybe with my low IQ I am easily amused. Or the pleasure is to play and some people are more into acting or other aspects that -D&D does not codify or do exceptionally well.

**edited for spelling

I've noticed this trend as well. My combats are rarely boring in games I run or play. Everyone is engaged there are plenty of "Oh ****" moments. Have fights against varying types of foes, have the enemy use logical tactics, use the environment to make things interesting, give PCs and monsters something to do other than attack now and then. The list goes on.

I'm not saying every single combat can be on the edge of your seat exciting, but for me most are fun on either side of the DM screen. Sometimes I swear people are talking about a different game than what I play.

 

[Laurefindel]

Morale rules or not, part of the issue of dragging combats to the end is that retreat is often more foolhardy than fighting back.

Bad guy wants to flee: disengage, move 30ft.
PC; move 30ft next to bad guy, attack.
Bad guy: disengage, move 30ft.
PC: move 30ft, attack…

There’s no way out. You’ll eventually get killed without doing any damage to your attacker. Let’s try running faster.

Bad guy: move 30ft, dash for an extra 30ft. Provoke attack of opportunity from PC when leaving.
PC: move 30ft, dash for an extra 30ft next to bad guy. PC is out of move/action.
Bad guy: move 30ft, dash for an extra 30ft, provoke attack of opportunity from PC…

Rince and repeat. Again, no way out. And that’s not counting ranged attacks.

One solution would be to put lots of baddies, but by the time it’s clear they’ll lose, there usually a lot less of them. If PCs want to flee, it means one (or two) will be pursued and killed and players get mad at other players. Better TPK and be mad at DM.

Another solution is to remove anyone who declares retreat out of combat right away. If you want to pursue, get out of combat too and initiate a chase. That usually gets luke-warm reactions at best.

Yet another solution is a gentlemen agreement to let bad guys escape when they turn tails. In my experience that rarely works because PCs are paranoid (often for good reasons mind you) and expect the bad guy to come back or send reinforcements, so the pragmatic solution is to make sure no one escape.

 

[DEFCON 1]

This is a problem that will never get solved, because there is a segment of the D&D populace that needs there to be mechanical rules to accomplish anything, and another section that wants open-ended narrative so that everyone can just state what they want to do for the betterment of the story. And never the twain shall meet.

The idea that a DM can make arbitrary decisions in a moment of battle to just "complete" situations and bounce away from the tactical wargame of D&D is the ultimate boon for some tables, and an anathema for others. @Laurefindel gives us a wonderful example of this right above this post-- the game mechanical results of trying to "retreat". The game has not been designed with any sort of airtight and robust mechanical formatting a la your typical wargame... so by following the letters of the rules we get into the circular issue of impossible retreat they post above. And I would say that is because I suspect the designers want players to be able to make the decision to just go narratively in and out of combat whenever a DM feels it is time... so in the case of retreats, the DM can just say "The monsters run"... and either they get away... or the players can make the narrative decision to chase after them if they want to. And if they do... then we can move away from the tactical wargame and use any sort of "chase rules" the DM wants instead.

Some tables appreciate this decision, other tables hate it. But it is what it is. D&D has not been a tactical wargame adaptation in a long, long time. So anyone who wants it to back that way is kind of stuck having to create those rules on their own. Unfortunate for them... but there's not much that can be done so long as the designers of D&D are interested in putting more narrative and story resolutions as legitimate options to the ending of scene rather than just game mechanics each and every time.

 

[Andvari]

Morale rules or not, part of the issue of dragging combats to the end is that retreat is often more foolhardy than fighting back.

Bad guy wants to flee: disengage, move 30ft.
PC; move 30ft next to bad guy, attack.
Bad guy: disengage, move 30ft.
PC: move 30ft, attack…

There’s no way out. You’ll eventually get killed without doing any damage to your attacker. Let’s try running faster.

Yes, that is the problem. Here the need arises to switch from combat mode to evasion mode. I don't know if 5E has rules for this, but BECMI does. Currently when I run Pathfinder 2E, if the monsters flee, I give the party 1 round of normal action against the fleeing monsters, and if they decide to chase they enter "chase mode" where they use Athletics or Fort checks against the monster's Athletics or Fort DC to see if they can keep up, with bonuses or higher DCs depending on speed differences.

I believe the Game Mastery Guide for PF2 actually has rules for chasing, but I'm not that familiar with them. I bet there is some official 5E material somewhere for resolving pursuits.

Edit: Just looked at the PF2 chase rules. There are four pages of rules, so probably better used for special events, such as chasing the BBEG over rooftops or escaping the collapsing pyramid, rather than as a general evasion resolution system. I think those are better resolved with some simple tests of the PCs' athleticism and cardio.

 

[overgeeked]

I bet there is some official 5E material somewhere for resolving pursuits.

They’re in the DMG.

 

[RuinousPowers]

Doesn't the 5e model rely on 6-8 combats per long rest to drain resources so the last fights (vs the Boss) are dangerous? If combats end when 25% of the enemies are defeated or a single monster takes 50% damage, won't that just leave the party mostly fresh when they get to the final dungeon encounters?

 

[Laurefindel]

I bet there is some official 5E material somewhere for resolving pursuits.

There are, but it’s unclear as to when a situation stops to be a round-by-round combat and starts to be a chase. My take is that happens as soon as a communal retreat decision is taken at the beginning of a round, or on one’s beginning of turn. Fortunately for me it was received well with my group, but it has met resistance of these boards.

 

[overgeeked]

Doesn't the 5e model rely on 6-8 combats per long rest to drain resources so the last fights (vs the Boss) are dangerous? If combats end when 25% of the enemies are defeated or a single monster takes 50% damage, won't that just leave the party mostly fresh when they get to the final dungeon encounters?

It’s 6-8 medium encounters per adventuring day. Kick those up to deadly and you only need 3-4.

The slog is when the PCs have burned the resources they’re going to and settled into the endless cantrip pew pew to finish off the fight. Dealing a few hits to the PCs from there and saying the monsters are dead saves time with the mechanical result being about 90% the same

 

[Andvari]

Doesn't the 5e model rely on 6-8 combats per long rest to drain resources so the last fights (vs the Boss) are dangerous? If combats end when 25% of the enemies are defeated or a single monster takes 50% damage, won't that just leave the party mostly fresh when they get to the final dungeon encounters?

I love this question because it makes you wonder - as I have - if the designers, when thinking of encounters in terms of resource drain, assume all enemies fight to the death, or if they have some expected percentage of fights ending early? And if so, what is it?

 

[overgeeked]

The question of fleeing also ignores all possible contexts except for everyone’s in melee with someone and there are zero ways to escape. If you’re having dynamic fights, there are going to be ways to escape. Horses and other mounts, flying and flying creatures, magic and magic items of all kinds. “You can’t ever escape” is a weird take.