Anaylze Situation (check)

[Vlos]

How often, when DMing, do your armed guards fight stupidly to their deaths, even when obviously out manned.

How do you determine that "they" know they are out manned? (note: this is not fear, just "common sense"). Being the GM you know how powerful the PCs are, but would the guards? I was thinking of some type of check based on level rather than a STAT or new skill. Or maybe you guys use Sense Motive, thought they may not be hostile, just really powerful?

For example a 1st level fighter may not know better than rushing 6 attackers, but a 5th level fighter knows better (assuming they are of equal level), where as a mage of 5th level may not be able to assess the situation of 6 attackers?

So was thinking a Fighter is probably best, while a fighter type is good and caster type is probably not so good. This can be assessed by the targets BAB.

So using the BAB as a bonus, then you would set DC checks at:
10 You have properly analyzed the situation in a very clear situation 1 .vs. 20
15 You have properly analyzed the situation in a clear situation 1 .vs. 6
20 You have properly analyzed the situation in a not-so clear situation 2 .vs. 3
25 You have properly analyzed the situation in a "hidden" situation 5 .vs. 1 (epic mage)


Examples:
10 A 1st level fighter is facing a mob of 20 or more town folk (you know what to do - run!)
15 A 1st level mage is facing 3 archers and 2 axemen (probably not good odds, run)
20 Two guards (5th level) are facing three thugs in a dark ally (probably more down there, best to pull them out than charge in)
25 A captain of guards and his crew at the gates approaches a lone mage with a small smirk on his face and well worn face (you have seen this before, the mage is very powerful and simply hiding his power, best to leave him alone)



Thoughts?

 

[Li Shenron]

I haven't used any dice rolls to handle that, but definitely I have addressed this kind of issue many times. Usually I simply take a look at the kind of creature, its level or CR, and its Int and Wis scores, and just try in a very lite manner to estimate what it would do.

I think using the BAB is quite a fine solution, since it pretty much goes together with "combat experience". Another possibility - more along with typical 3ed stuff - would be to use a specific skill (called e.g. Knowledge(War) or Combat Assessment) which you then give as class skill only to those classes it fits best. Using BAB is less standard, but it has the advantage of being for free.

 

[S'mon]

Because morale is a group issue not individual, IMO Will saves or similar are not the answer.
I use group Morale scores as in old D&D - I find the 2d6 system works best - NPC group has morale between 2 and 12, roll 2d6 for morale check a couple of times per battle at appropriate moments, & if roll exceeds Morale they break and run. You could use a d20 system if you wanted but I prefer 2d6. Typical NPCs have morale 6-7, elite troops typically 8-9, fanatics 10+.

 

[the Jester]

In my opinion, the lack of a good morale system is one of 3e's biggest flaws.

I tend to use a combo of judgment, Will saves and a d20 "agressiveness" check (higher is more aggressive). Is it 'they killed my friends, I must escape' or is it 'they killed my friends, I must avenge them!'?

 

[Tonguez]

I work morale using a will save on the basis that
1. A creature will naturally flee to perserve its life
2. It is an act of Will to NOT flee and stay fighting
3. To choose to flee is to voluntarily fail the will save

so most NPC will flee if they are in anyway threatened (ie the PCs hit the commoners and the commoners (try to) flee (dying as the PCs take AoOs))
Guards will stay longer (but not much) maybe willing to go to 75% Max HP
Someone fighting for honour or revenge might even drop to 50% and a mother protecting her babies might go 10% Max HP