D&D 5E Bravely running away

[Lanefan]

How would you rule it if 2/4 members of the party are unconscious and the remaining two players decide it's time to retreat, and the enemy has reason to pursue them?

Then the retreaters get chased.

The question then becomes whether a) all the enemy chase the retreaters thus leaving the unconscious characters behind to - if they're lucky - recover on their own, or b) the enemy splits, leaving some to deal with the fallen characters while others chase the retreaters.

Beyond that it'd be entirely situational what happens next.

 

[Lanefan]

What I certainly would never use is combat rules. Movement in combat is just meant to represent that, movement in combat, not to get out of combat. Stuff like dashing doesn't make sense outside of combat, initiative doesn't make sense outside of combat, and even a creature's speed value doesn't make sense outside of combat. If I haven't said it enough times I can say it again: rules designed for combat do not make sense out of combat.

Some of those rules are universal, however, and extend beyond combat.

Dashing - probably just sprinting if out of combat - still makes sense as a short burst of maximum-effort speed.

Initiative as written doesn't make sense but something that randomizes the timing a bit sure does, even if it's just opposed d20 rolls.

Movement rates are universal, as an indicator of how fast a creature can go whether in combat or not. A large dog, for example, can always outrun a person; as can a horse or a rabbit. Where the game's abstraction falls down is that it assumes every member of a species has the exact same move rate and doesn't allow for any variance within that species; as in can Celesta the Elf run faster than Elhalathe the Elf in general and (more relevant right now!) which one ate her Wheaties this morning and is running faster today.

Also, I wouldn't care a poo about realism. If the characters choose to retreat, I want retreat to feel maybe like in a movie, not reality, just like I want combat to feel like in a movie and not reality. Simulationism has no value for me, and it's also a recipe for endless disappointment.

We have almost-directly opposed priorities here and yet might be coming to the same conclusions.

 

[Lanefan]

My primary issue is the bit that I quoted in my post: the chase ends when the pursuers are close enough to catch their quarry. So a chase works if the big scary bad guys see you from 100ft down the road... It doesn't work if you're already in combat and want to get away, which is the whole thing here that is, unless you start house ruling it all anyway.

Well, yes it does; if one assumes that when someone flees from combat they establish that separation right away. Doesn't have to be 100' of separation; 10' will do unless the pursuer has an 11+-foot reach, but only if you don't have movement happen in little mini-teleports but instead be a fluid thing where the separation remains constant unless one can outrun the other or unless (by some sort of die roll) one stumbles or puts on a burst of speed.

 

[Lanefan]

But if you do need to run, the best way to escape from an adjacent single creature of equal speed (and no reach weapon) is to Shove them back 5' and then move your speed away. At that point the enemy has to Dash to get adjacent to you, which means they can't attack you on their turn, and on your turn you Shove them again. Sure, every time you fail to Shove them they'll have their action to be able to attack you on their turn, but you only take damage in rounds where you fail the Shove and they succeed in their attack roll. (Against enemies with Extra Attack or Multiattack, you're probably better off Dashing each turn, limiting them to a single opportunity attack.)

This is all based on the IMO very faulty rules logic of movement happening in little teleports.

In reality, during the 6 seconds of the round the distance between pursuer and quarry (assuming equal speed) would remain roughly the same throughout as they are both in constant motion, meaning that unless the pursuer has reach greater than the separation distance - or is throwing/shooting things at the quarry en route - no attacking can occur.

 

[Distracted DM]

Well, yes it does; if one assumes that when someone flees from combat they establish that separation right away. Doesn't have to be 100' of separation; 10' will do unless the pursuer has an 11+-foot reach, but only if you don't have movement happen in little mini-teleports but instead be a fluid thing where the separation remains constant unless one can outrun the other or unless (by some sort of die roll) one stumbles or puts on a burst of speed.

Following the chase rules:
1. You leave your downed comrades behind. Again, very unlikely that friends at a table are going to opt to do this.
2. You're essentially wasting a turn NOT fighting. Chases are still done in initiative order. Instead, you're running away. Your enemies will get a free round of attacks, and then start pursuit of whoever else is left.
3. This seems like a tremendous waste of table time, when there are other games with simpler retreat systems in place. Not only are you going to be spending time, turn by turn, trying to escape- your downed friends are going to be sitting around waiting for it all to end as the fleeing players with fleeing characters basically have to experience defeat in an excruciatingly drawn-out, desperate fashion. This is the worst kind of slog gameplay.

I like simulationist rules in many places, but in the awful parts like realizing that you're going to fail and have to just try to survive, I'd like those parts to be brief but poignant. Obviously this is my opinion- maybe there are players that enjoy what I consider an awful morale-shattering slog.

 

[Lanefan]

Following the chase rules:
1. You leave your downed comrades behind. Again, very unlikely that friends at a table are going to opt to do this.

Depends on whether everyone is playing true to their characters.

2. You're essentially wasting a turn NOT fighting. Chases are still done in initiative order. Instead, you're running away. Your enemies will get a free round of attacks, and then start pursuit of whoever else is left.

As written the chase rules seem to be neither useful nor realistic.

3. This seems like a tremendous waste of table time, when there are other games with simpler retreat systems in place. Not only are you going to be spending time, turn by turn, trying to escape- your downed friends are going to be sitting around

Fact of life when your character is down. Get used to it.

waiting for it all to end as the fleeing players with fleeing characters basically have to experience defeat in an excruciatingly drawn-out, desperate fashion. This is the worst kind of slog gameplay.

Why is it automatic that they're goiong to be defeated?

And if your answer is "the chase rules make it that way" then I return to my point that the chase rules aren't any good.

I like simulationist rules in many places, but in the awful parts like realizing that you're going to fail and have to just try to survive, I'd like those parts to be brief but poignant. Obviously this is my opinion- maybe there are players that enjoy what I consider an awful morale-shattering slog.

I've seen situations where, once the characters (and thus, players) knew someone in the party had managed to flee, the goal of those still fighting became one of seeing how many of the enemy they could drag down with them as they died; trusting that the escapee(s) would take steps to bring them back to life later.

 

[el-remmen]

I have houseruled a "Run" action for my 5E games.

As an Action you can move 4 times your speed in a straight line. This subsumes your normal turn's movement. Any opportunity attacks you draw while moving this way are made with Advantage.

Basically, it represents putting your head down and sprinting. I adopted this from 3E. Heavy armor limits this to 3x your Speed and I have a feat that gets you 5x your speed as long as you aren't in heavy armor.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Depends on whether everyone is playing true to their characters.

What if their characters are good people who care about others?

 

[GMMichael]

What if their characters are good people who care about others?

What, the bards? They can stay and fight a losing battle. That's fine with me.

 

[Lanefan]

What if their characters are good people who care about others?

Then they can stay stood in and die to no useful purpose; or they can bug out, survive, and then do whatever's needed to get their friends revived (or rescued, if they were captured) later.