D&D 5E Bravely running away

[ezo]

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

In general, no, I don't have a problem with the rules (well, not much of one...). Escape should not be an easy option. Surrender? Sure. Hopefully the enemy will want you alive...

But it should be as hard to escape for the PCs as the foes they are facing warrant it.

If they are being chased by wolves, and use a free action to drop food after a round or two of running, that will help. The wolves are most likely defending their range/pack or hunting and looking for food. The rules can support this, with a bit of DM "rulings" since the rules are never complete.

If they are engaged with a creatures in a dungeon or cave, basically invading these creatures home probably, then the creatures will not just let the PCs get away. They will see the PCs as a threat who could and would likely return.

So, in such cases depending on the nature of the creature, they will pursue and the chase rules and cyclical initiative don't really support this. The PCs will thus have to resort to some other manner to escape (as I said, cunning action to increase distance, spells, etc.). Without some other means of escape, the rules practically ensure the fleeing PCs will suffer one attack against them every round while trying to flee--and eventually either have to surrender or have one or more die.

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.

Sure, but I haven't "rejected all (or any) advice", have I???

I know you can change whatever you want to and/or create house-rules to help PCs escape--well, really to make it plausible given the game design and structure.

But, for myself, a simple "sure, just let the PCs get away" isn't a viable option unless the foes they are fleeing from would just let them goe. In all other cases, it should be hard as hell for PCs to escape--it is part of the danger--and a simple "sure, just let the PCs get away" option is a no-no.

Would the players find it fair if creatures they are fighting could always just "escape" if I choose it? IMO probably not.

 

[S'mon]

?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.

Whereas from my POV it's an issue of inappropriate application of rules. Like using the combat rules for a conversation. Or creating a peasant rail gun.

 

[ezo]

Whereas from my POV it's an issue of inappropriate application of rules.

How so? The chase rules, for example, seem like a very appropriate application of rules if the PCs are trying to escape...

 

[S'mon]

In general, no, I don't have a problem with the rules (well, not much of one...). Escape should not be an easy option. Surrender? Sure. Hopefully the enemy will want you alive...

But it should be as hard to escape for the PCs as the foes they are facing warrant it.

If they are being chased by wolves, and use a free action to drop food after a round or two of running, that will help. The wolves are most likely defending their range/pack or hunting and looking for food. The rules can support this, with a bit of DM "rulings" since the rules are never complete.

If they are engaged with a creatures in a dungeon or cave, basically invading these creatures home probably, then the creatures will not just let the PCs get away. They will see the PCs as a threat who could and would likely return.

So, in such cases depending on the nature of the creature, they will pursue and the chase rules and cyclical initiative don't really support this. The PCs will thus have to resort to some other manner to escape (as I said, cunning action to increase distance, spells, etc.). Without some other means of escape, the rules practically ensure the fleeing PCs will suffer one attack against them every round while trying to flee--and eventually either have to surrender or have one or more die.


Sure, but I haven't "rejected all (or any) advice", have I???

I know you can change whatever you want to and/or create house-rules to help PCs escape--well, really to make it plausible given the game design and structure.

But, for myself, a simple "sure, just let the PCs get away" isn't a viable option unless the foes they are fleeing from would just let them goe. In all other cases, it should be hard as hell for PCs to escape--it is part of the danger--and a simple "sure, just let the PCs get away" option is a no-no.

Would the players find it fair if creatures they are fighting could always just "escape" if I choose it? IMO probably not.

Just on the last point, enemies often flee in my games and I've never had players have a problem with this. The most common reaction is relief and happiness at winning the fight. PCs and monsters occasionally go to lengths to chase down fleeing foes but it's not the default on either side. Of course sometimes creatures are killed while trying to flee, too. Or flee - get caught - surrender. PCs often spare surrendering foes.

 

[Distracted DM]

How so? The chase rules, for example, seem like a very appropriate application of rules if the PCs are trying to escape...

I really don't get the chase rules- they don't seem to let the fleeing characters escape.

A chase ends when one side or the other stops, when the quarry escapes, or when the pursuers are close enough to their quarry to catch it.

If you're in close combat with a group of hobgoblins and hell hounds in some hills and you want to flee... they're going to catch up to you immediately. Resume combat, except now you've spent your turn(s) trying to escape instead of healing/fighting.

 

[S'mon]

How so? The chase rules, for example, seem like a very appropriate application of rules if the PCs are trying to escape...

I'm not currently running 5e but that makes sense. What makes less sense to me is treating the whole world as a chess board of 5' squares on which everyone can move exactly 30' per move. And they all do it one at a time. I treat that as an abstraction for the combat system not as an in-world reality.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Whereas from my POV it's an issue of inappropriate application of rules. Like using the combat rules for a conversation. Or creating a peasant rail gun.

Is that a rail gun manned by peasants, or a rail gun that uses peasants as ammunition?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm not currently running 5e but that makes sense. What makes less sense to me is treating the whole world as a chess board of 5' squares on which everyone can move exactly 30' per move. And they all do it one at a time. I treat that as an abstraction for the combat system not as an in-world reality.

Like I said, movement is not granular enough. There should be different speeds based on what you're doing and a random element (and/or modifiers) used when otherwise both parties are equally fast.

I'm always in favor of fixing the rules to make them work better for you, by whatever definition of "better" you favor.

 

[ezo]

Just on the last point, enemies often flee in my games and I've never had players have a problem with this. The most common reaction is relief and happiness at winning the fight. PCs and monsters occasionally go to lengths to chase down fleeing foes but it's not the default on either side. Of course sometimes creatures are killed while trying to flee, too. Or flee - get caught - surrender. PCs often spare surrendering foes.

LOL I have enemies try to escape, but often they are pursued, caught, surrender, etc.

Relief is rarely felt, since if the enemies are fleeing most often the PCs have the encounter well-in-hand already.

I'm not currently running 5e but that makes sense. What makes less sense to me is treating the whole world as a chess board of 5' squares on which everyone can move exactly 30' per move. And they all do it one at a time. I treat that as an abstraction for the combat system not as an in-world reality.

Oh, on that point I argee. Creatures should have more varied speeds, for example. And after the manticore failed escape scene, I have doubted the fly speed for any creature that has a natural fly speed. The speeds listed would barely be fast enough to keep most birds aloft, let alone flying at their typical speeds.

Even treating it as an abstraction, there are some issues IMO that pop up, but general DMs just have to go with it and whatever makes most sense for the scene works for me.

I really don't get the chase rules- they don't seem to let the fleeing characters escape.

A chase ends when one side or the other stops, when the quarry escapes, or when the pursuers are close enough to their quarry to catch it.

If you're in close combat with a group of hobgoblins and hell hounds in some hills and you want to flee... they're going to catch up to you immediately. Resume combat, except now you've spent your turn(s) trying to escape instead of healing/fighting.

And that is the crux of the issue for most groups.

A hell hound has a speed of 50. So, a PC engaged with a hellhound runs, prokoving an OA, but survives and moves & Dashes 60 feet. Meanwhile the hellhound moves 50 feet, and breathes with a 15' cone, hitting the PC. The PC lives and runs again, the hellhound moves again and either breathes again (if it recharged), or dashes to get in front of the PC and engage them again. Now, the PC provokes another OA, and it continues. The PC also has to worry about exhaustion because of dashing, where the hellhound doesn't have to dash every round to keep up.

You are better of standing and fighting or surrendering.

Without magic to enable your escape, even cunning action won't likely help until you can break away enough to find someplace to hide and manage to beat the DC 20 passive perception for the hellhound (due to keen senses).

I really don't get the chase rules- they don't seem to let the fleeing characters escape.

It is very hard. But then again, if you ever played tag, usually someone does get tagged. Escape isn't as easy as some people like to think IMO...

 

[Mistwell]

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?

Indeed, this has been my 2 groups problem since 3e. Everyone says "there are battles your party needs to learn to run away from" and yet both your points were always present. The monsters always chase us, often calling for help from other fresh monsters as they chase us. And because of different PC speeds, often all that happened was slower PCs got eaten first, and the inability to help each other or fight while running away at top speeds meant TPK or at least a lot of death. Until you get to levels where a party can all Dimension Door or Teleport out, running away is often just a different way of everyone dying.