D&D 5E Bravely running away

[Nefermandias]

A lot can happen in one round. I'm not talking about a fight that the players shouldn't have gotten into, say something the GM telegraphs "this isn't a fight you should stick around for." I'm talking about the usual battles where everyone is kind of wounded but no one is down.. and then a fireball downs one player, another gets critted and down, now it's the fighters turn but the cleric goes next and he could get someone up etc.

What exactly are you suggesting here? Should we as DMs go out of our way to protect the players from bad luck even more than the system already does?

Not a dig at you, I'm genuinely trying to understand the mindset.

 

[Clint_L]

It is pretty rare unless there is a fairly significant speed difference for one group to be able to flee from another.

Huh?

Human beings all have the same speed as each other, on average, and people have been successfully retreating for as long as there's been conflict. I am very confused by why this keeps being described as almost impossibly difficult in D&D. It's not; we do it all the time.

There are a zillion things players can come up with to make their escape, and in my experience players tend to be rather clever.

I feel like this is a DM issue, not a player or rules issue.

 

[Nefermandias]

Huh?

Human beings all have the same speed as each other, on average, and people have been successfully retreating for as long as there's been conflict. I am very confused by why this keeps being described as almost impossibly difficult in D&D. It's not; we do it all the time.

There are a zillion things players can come up with to make their escape, and in my experience players tend to be rather clever.

I feel like this is a DM issue, not a player or rules issue.

Yes, I absolutely see that as a DM issue. The problem arises from seeing the whole world under the grided combat rules instead of shifting to a more free form adjudication approach when the situation requires it.

If a group can disengage and retreat from conflict in the real world, that should absolutely be an option in ttRPGs too. Heck, human beings are known to beat even horses over long distances.

As I see it, the DM should not be afraid of seizing the situation and using the tools at his disposal to resolve any situation. Evasion and pursuit shouldn't be any different.

 

[Quickleaf]

From another thread, the topic of retreat has come up, it sounds like it might be difficult for a couple of reasons:

1. The Cyclical nature of initiative makes it difficult for the party to retreat (Ol' Tim the Timid can still run off on his own though).
2. Movement speeds are largely the same between PCs and NPCs/Monsters, if you run away by dashing, the enemy can mostly keep up.

The only time I can recall players retreating in my game was during a session which was played more narratively rather than with the actual rules, so it doesn't really count (it was a hit and run on an opposing army's baggage train). They did also manage to escape engaging in a combat using a skill challenge, which again doesn't count, and perhaps that's what I'd switch to once the players discuss that they want to retreat, but it'd be interesting to hear what others would do.

So, to other DMs, if in the middle of combat players decide they should retreat, how would you run it?

Hang on, I got house rules for that... slightly Dungeon World-esque

Retreat
When the party chooses to retreat from danger, at any point on a player’s turn they make a group initiative check versus the passive initiative of their foes. A PC who is unable to move does not roll. A PC who is encumbered, carrying another PC, or slowed suffers disadvantage on the roll (i.e. they cannot escape unless group, I dunno, stuffs them in a bag of holding). A PC who had an escape plan in advance or who took action during the scene to facilitate escape gains advantage. Same goes for the monsters/NPCs.

If half or more of the PCs succeed, they escape. Otherwise, the scene continues and escape is no longer an option unless circumstances change. However, if they escape, for each PC who failed the check, the party must pick one:
• The party has been split up, and possibly lost.
• The party abandons the treasure or loses a significant item.
• Each PC takes damage equal to a single opportunity atack from the monsters/NPCs.
• Even if the monsters/NPCs could not, or chose not to, immediately pursue, they’re out there looking for the party.
• The party lands in some new sort of trouble

 

[ezo]

Human beings all have the same speed as each other, on average, and people have been successfully retreating for as long as there's been conflict.

And human beings get chased down and killed from behind throughout history when they tried retreating as well.

I am very confused by why this seems difficult in D&D. It's not; we do it all the time.

(bold added) You wouldn't in my games.

You said yourself you set up your scenarios to allow PCs to escape, etc. I don't. The enemies (if intelligent at all) strive to have the battlefield as much in their favor as possible. I don't favor the PCs at all. They have to find a way to work things out to favor themselves. If the players are at a point where they need to escape, often they will no longer have the resources needed to help them escape--they will have exausted those options.

Some of the things you describe in your post upthread seem to imply things that aren't quite RAW. How your enemies behave is also an issue from your limited descriptions. If the enemy has the upper hand, for example, and a lone PC runs over to threaten the boss, why would the minions run to the aid of the boss when they could swarm the other PCs, take one captive, force them to surrender or watch their friend die, etc.?

The two examples I posted show how in D&D attempts to retreat will often lead to failure. Unless one side or the other can really out distance / maneuver the other side, the cyclical nature of initiative means the chasers will usually get at least one attack per round against those they are chasing.

Just running away rarely works. Distractions, etc. like you suggest require actions to implement, and if you are already engaged with the enemy, that means you really aren't using your actions to get away, and they continue to attack you.

It is very much a rules issue... as most people have posted. RAW does not easily allow escape--you absolutely need something (cunning action, magic, etc.) to help you get away OR you have to be in a position to out distance and out maneuver your pursuer.

The very fact that you "do it all the time" simply demonstrates to me a difference in game style more than anything else. How a BBEG could escape with a simple fog spell, for instance, screams of a situational thing. How big was the encounter area? How close were the PCs? How large was the area of the fog? If the PCs can't see the BBEG, how does the BBEG see to escape? And so on...

And how "clever" a player is I suppose is fairly subjective. The way you express it I find a bit off-putting. It almost seems like you are saying "if you can't find a way to escape, you are not clever."

 

[S'mon]

And human beings get chased down and killed from behind throughout history when they tried retreating as well.


(bold added) You wouldn't in my games.

You said yourself you set up your scenarios to allow PCs to escape, etc. I don't. The enemies (if intelligent at all) strive to have the battlefield as much in their favor as possible. I don't favor the PCs at all. They have to find a way to work things out to favor themselves. If the players are at a point where they need to escape, often they will no longer have the resources needed to help them escape--they will have exausted those options.

Some of the things you describe in your post upthread seem to imply things that aren't quite RAW. How your enemies behave is also an issue from your limited descriptions. If the enemy has the upper hand, for example, and a lone PC runs over to threaten the boss, why would the minions run to the aid of the boss when they could swarm the other PCs, take one captive, force them to surrender or watch their friend die, etc.?

The two examples I posted show how in D&D attempts to retreat will often lead to failure. Unless one side or the other can really out distance / maneuver the other side, the cyclical nature of initiative means the chasers will usually get at least one attack per round against those they are chasing.

Just running away rarely works. Distractions, etc. like you suggest require actions to implement, and if you are already engaged with the enemy, that means you really aren't using your actions to get away, and they continue to attack you.

It is very much a rules issue... as most people have posted. RAW does not easily allow escape--you absolutely need something (cunning action, magic, etc.) to help you get away OR you have to be in a position to out distance and out maneuver your pursuer.

The very fact that you "do it all the time" simply demonstrates to me a difference in game style more than anything else. How a BBEG could escape with a simple fog spell, for instance, screams of a situational thing. How big was the encounter area? How close were the PCs? How large was the area of the fog? If the PCs can't see the BBEG, how does the BBEG see to escape? And so on...

And how "clever" a player is I suppose is fairly subjective. The way you express it I find a bit off-putting. It almost seems like you are saying "if you can't find a way to escape, you are not clever."

So you want to make it hard for the PCs to escape, and you find the rules support you in this. So, no problem?

What I don't get are GMs who complain that the rules make retreat difficult or impossible, then reject all advice to make it easier than the way they run it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So you want to make it hard for the PCs to escape, and you find the rules support you in this. So, no problem?

What I don't get are GMs who complain that the rules make retreat difficult or impossible, then reject all advice to make it easier than the way they run it.

I suppose it depends on what design philosophy said advice is based upon. We don't all play the same way, after all.

 

[Distracted DM]

I don't see a difference. Those are changing circumstances that the players should take into consideration when making choices for their PCs. Bad luck has to be allowed to happen (on both sides) or why are we rolling dice?

I'm just saying that it can be very difficult to tell when it's time to retreat unless it's so overwhelmingly obvious that the GM says "your characters would know to run."

 

[Distracted DM]

So you want to make it hard for the PCs to escape, and you find the rules support you in this. So, no problem?

What I don't get are GMs who complain that the rules make retreat difficult or impossible, then reject all advice to make it easier than the way they run it.

?I have to imagine? that the GMs complaining are going so because they would like a viable system/rule from the game (DnD5.xx) itself for retreat, rather than house rules or stealing from other games etc.

 

[Micah Sweet]

?I have to imagine? that the GMs complaining are going so because they would like a viable system/rule from the game (DnD5.xx) itself for retreat, rather than house rules or stealing from other games etc.

Never a good reason to not use a technique IMO. Official doesn't mean anything special to me beyond simple convenience.