D&D 5E Chases, what has worked and what has not?

[Drudenfusz]

A chase is nothing that should be enforced, if the players have taking stuff that could immediatly bring the chase to an end, then to ignore that would devalue their choices and pretty much simply railroad them into a chase. Had a few weeks ago the situation that our group got robbed of the magical macguffin, but instead of chansing the culprit, we simply let the ranger shot him down (took three rounds, but even with dashing the thief didn't escaped the long range of the longbow). And the whole group supported the ranger (I played a bard so I gave him my bardic inspirations), nobody seemed really that interessed in running. So, players that make choices might not be interested in playing the advanture how one plans them, but prefer a far different approach and that should be honoured.

 

[RaashBorg]

His ideas about decision points (as in thinking about them, ensuring your encounters have them, and ending encounters when your players are out) are sound.

However, he resorts to abstract distance. While a common technique, in the context of D&D (especially 3e or 4e) it's kind of a cheat.

Why? Because it is the combat system of D&D that sets strict limits on the fleeing assassin's chances of escape.

What I mean by that is, sure, if you run the encounter like Angry DM where assassins are "five steps ahead", then her chances of escape is however high (or low) as you the DM feel like it.

But you are now not using the rules of D&D. You are, in fact, using made-up rules that the players won't be masters of, much less know of at all. And much more importantly, you have made it impossible to translate certain character abilities. (Such as that thief of yours who move twice as fast)

And by doing so, you've just eliminated the vast majority of pitfalls that the thread starter is actually asking about.

For some groups, this is a good thing. But to actually answer the question, that is "does chases work in the context of D&D, specifically its combat/movement framework?" we need to actually use that.

---

Actually answering the post needs to be out of scope for this particular post, but let me start off the discussion by saying that any party not of the lowest levels will cover much more ground than you expect.

So, unless you want the assassin to be caught immediately and trivially, start off the encounter at a way longer distance than you think you need. And add many more obstacles and challenges for the party to overcome than you think.

And still, if you really need the assassin to escape, or even escape for a while, you need to play dirty, with hired thugs, lookalikes meant to divert the heroes. And don't forget about magic - once play hits tier II, the assassin could and should have some sort of magical assistance to make it just a little bit harder to catch her.

Yeah, I didn't notice that OP wanted to use a specific set of rules from the DMG.
I've found more enjoyment with abstracts when dealing with encounters that aren't strictly combat. But I go for cinematic scenes and throw out rules all the time .

 

[CapnZapp]

A chase is nothing that should be enforced, if the players have taking stuff that could immediatly bring the chase to an end, then to ignore that would devalue their choices and pretty much simply railroad them into a chase. Had a few weeks ago the situation that our group got robbed of the magical macguffin, but instead of chansing the culprit, we simply let the ranger shot him down (took three rounds, but even with dashing the thief didn't escaped the long range of the longbow). And the whole group supported the ranger (I played a bard so I gave him my bardic inspirations), nobody seemed really that interessed in running. So, players that make choices might not be interested in playing the advanture how one plans them, but prefer a far different approach and that should be honoured.

Exactly.

A player that selects a fast race, a quick class, and always selects magic stuff that lets him move faster (fly potion, expeditious retreat castings, winged boots or what have you) is, in effect, telling you:

"I like catching prey"

Or, more to the point,

"My idea of playing a hero is a character that nobody escapes from"



In other words, you need to look at your player characters and ask yourself: should I even think about adding a chase scene?

Now, you might think my answer would be "no", but that'd be wrong

What it means is that you should definitely add chase scenes, but what you should never do is expect the quarry to get away.

Of course you should add chase scenes - after all, the player whose character is moving 60 feet a round wants to showcase this by easily catching prey, so by all means add prey for her to catch!

But what you can't do is add scenes that rely on a "long exciting chase" or "after the assassin got away, the party gets the job of finding him".

You can start chases. Just don't expect them to be long, or exciting.

You can have assassins that assassinate. Just don't expect them to get away. (Instead plan already from the beginning: "Impressive speed there. That assassin never saw what hit him! Say we have a mission requiring quick scouting speeds that you might be interested in. What do you say")

---

This is just like how D&D have always been a poor choice for low-magic investigative scenarios (a la Warhammer): detect spells make short work of that, except at the very lowest level.

So before we can even begin to discuss chase scenes, we must realize we are discussing mundane chase scenes.

And that's perfectly fine in a party full of dwarves, plate fighters, and dwarven plate fighters. But not in a party full of monks, rogues and rouged wizards!

Not mundane chases, that is.

At mid- to high levels, all bets are off. Feel free to include chase scenes where you need to catch flying dragons, ethereal ghosts or, I don't know, randomly teleporting slaadi. Having 10 more feet of movement won't make or break that chase!

 

[CapnZapp]

Yeah, I didn't notice that OP wanted to use a specific set of rules from the DMG.
I've found more enjoyment with abstracts when dealing with encounters that aren't strictly combat. But I go for cinematic scenes and throw out rules all the time .

Fair enuff...

When I'm using the standard combat rules for a chase, it often is because it's a regular combat turned-chase.

That is, somebody is trying to flee from a combat. Rather than me having set up a special chase scene.

Still, depending on your players, it can be hard to argue "let's not use initiative and rounds and feet of movement because the chase will be more exiting". (Of course, some groups have already made their choice. I'm not talking about your group here, RaashBorg, I'm talking about a group used to the rules but not the idea of a disassociated chase scene)

After all, this means you are denying that extra five feet of movement the wood elf player selected by playing a wood elf. For instance.

Still, if all your players happen to have average movement (say 25-30 ft) they'll probably accept. But if one is playing a Rogue Monk Barbarian, that should tell you the same thing as when the game grants Detect Whatever.

 

[pukunui]

I have yet to come across a set of chase rules with which I have been satisfied. I tried running a chase just using turn-based combat once and that was awful - it was all stop/start with the quarry constantly having to withdraw or take an OA from the lead PC. I've also used abstraction, but that can often take the excitement out of it. I tried doing them as skill challenges in 4e and SWSE; unfortunately, I never could quite execute the concept as well as I would've liked.

I like the sound of the Angry DM's chase scene, but I haven't had a chance to try it out yet.

The chase rules that were in the alpha playtest DMG were pretty naff. I tried them out and didn't like the result. The ones in the final DMG are a bit better but I haven't tried them yet myself.

I think the key is, as others have said already, not to plan a chase with a predetermined result (eg. the quarry gets away, or the chase lasts for x number of rounds, or whatever). Just go with the flow, as it were.

EDIT: The FATE version of Bulldogs! had a decent-sounding chase mechanic involving the quarry setting a DC against which both it and the pursuer had to roll. That kind of worked but still didn't seem to be quite as fluid and exciting as it could have been.

 

[Li Shenron]

Cunning action: Monks also have good movement abilities. Sure, rogues are going to have an advantage getting away or catching the quarry, but that's just what they are good at. There are a lot of various other abilities and spells that could come into play to hold them off, though.

Spells: Yeah someone could cast hold person, but that's the beauty of it. If they choose to cast a spell, they can't dash, and therefore if the spell doesn't work, they have fallen behind in the chase.

Ranged attacks: The same thing as spells. You could stop, aim your bow, and shoot. You may hit the quarry and kill him. But you may only injure him or miss entirely, and you have fallen behind in the chase, giving him a greater chance to get away.

Remember that at the end of everybody's action for the round, the quarry gets a chance to try to slip away and hide. The more objects or crowds there are to try to hide behind, the easier it will be. The fewer, the harder it will be.

All good points.

I don't know the actual form of the chase rules, but I would have supposed that when using them, the racial speed differences would be ignored (to avoid the fastest race to always catch the lowest race) but maybe this is not a problem (and speed differences are smaller in 5e).

I am not so sure about characters with the ability to take an extra move in their turn... doesn't this apply only in combat? Or do the chase rules say that the characters are indeed considered in combat?

Similarly, I would not expect OA to be applicable during a chase.

 

[RaashBorg]

All good points.

I don't know the actual form of the chase rules, but I would have supposed that when using them, the racial speed differences would be ignored (to avoid the fastest race to always catch the lowest race) but maybe this is not a problem (and speed differences are smaller in 5e).

I am not so sure about characters with the ability to take an extra move in their turn... doesn't this apply only in combat? Or do the chase rules say that the characters are indeed considered in combat?

Similarly, I would not expect OA to be applicable during a chase.

Yeah, I wouldn't expect higher speed in combat to directly translate to running faster; I imagine it to be partly a measure of maneuverability. Yet, obviously some classes/races should be faster...

I think the rogue's cunning action is more straight forward. It's not that the rogue can run twice as fast, it's that he can move at "top" speed AND still get off an attack. Other classes have to slow down. Still uncertain to me if this should translate to overland speed in a chase.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think the rogue's cunning action is more straight forward. It's not that the rogue can run twice as fast, it's that he can move at "top" speed AND still get off an attack.

That might be how it's intended, but it's not how it works at the moment: the Rogue can move, take the dash action (which means extra movement/speed) and use its special ability to take another dash action, so 3x speed movement per round really.

 

[aramis erak]

For chases I think the best way is a table you make yourself, using the DMG tables as a guide. I think ignore detailed movement rates, the thief double move completely ruins the chase mechanic, they'll always arrive first and easily catch almost all opponents... So instead I suggest treating it as a kind of flexible skill/ability challenge - decide on a starting distance (180'), then athletics checks or whatever increase or decrease the increment by a set amount (30'), and make everyone roll on the chase table sometimes. I havent seen the paizo chase deck, but it might be worth checking out. As an earlier poster suggested, be prepared for the PCs to shortcut your chase somehow and catch the guy immediately, so if you dont want him caught dont run a chase. Best of luck!

The thief's double move results in double the number of dash actions for only 50% extra distance... The limit is, as I read it, on dash actions, not on rounds of chase.

In other words, sprinters don't endure.

 

[Ristamar]

His ideas about decision points (as in thinking about them, ensuring your encounters have them, and ending encounters when your players are out) are sound.

However, he resorts to abstract distance. While a common technique, in the context of D&D (especially 3e or 4e) it's kind of a cheat.

Why? Because it is the combat system of D&D that sets strict limits on the fleeing assassin's chances of escape.

Of course, his "cheat" is likely inspired by his opinion that the combat rules suck for everything that's not combat...

Avoid Using the Combat Rules Whenever Possible

I realize this is the most controversial thing I’m going to say: always look for opportunities to throw the combat rules out (initiative, action economy, and so on). Because, the fact is, they are pretty limited. They don’t work particularly well except in very specific situations (remember the disclaimer, I love combat, stay calm). Specifically, they work well in pitched battles between two roughly equal forces (you know, within a few levels and roughly equally sized). That’s it.

Look, you don’t try to turn everything in the game into a Strength check. You don’t try to turn everything in the game into an Interaction scene. You use the Strength check when a Strength check is what you need. And use Interaction scenes when there is actually an interaction. For that matter, you don’t roll the f$&%ing dice just because a person does a thing. You need the possibility of success, the possibility of failure, and risks or consequences that make it matter. Right?

So don’t try to turn everything into a combat just because you have two forces using violence against each other. If you can get away with not using the combat rules and end up with a scene that is just as good (or better), don’t use them. And that goes for even partial things, like initiative. I’ve seen some DMs use initiative rolls in social interaction scenes to keep things going in some kind of order. And that’s terrible. Those DMs need to stop it. Because initiative order is inherently constraining. Especially in something like an open conversation. How do people jump in and support other people’s points? What if they have nothing useful to say when their turn comes up? Why impose that structure instead of just, as a DM, managing the pace.

Always always always ask yourself whether you really have a combat meant to be handled by the combat rules before you ask for initiative rolls. Try to put off the initiative roll as long as possible. And try to drop out of the combat rules as soon as you can. Your game will simply be better.

...which also relates to his argument that a combat retreat within D&D (and D&D-like systems) is almost always a futile option.

Nowhere to Run To, Nowhere to Hide

The other major problem with D&D is that it doesn’t handle retreat well. It actually doesn’t handle retreat at all. The problem is the f$&%ing initiative structure and action economy. While that stuff works really well to build fun, engaging battles against reasonably equally matched foes, it completely falls apart when you try to do anything else. Like retreating. Even a fighting withdrawal is very difficult unless some PCs have very specific skillsets that let them exert a zone of control on the battlefield.

Fifth edition makes it harder by limiting the ability of PCs to take actions to adjust the initiative order. Because the key to a good, coordinated retreat (or even a rout) is that all the PCs can make the decision to retreat at once and act on it. That is, they have to be able to act as a unit. If they are artificially locked into taking turns interspersed with monster turns, they often end up with some people trapped behind the monster lines. And then the others won’t run.

On top of that, the granularity of creature speeds means that it’s rare that any creature can flee and evade any other creature. Most creatures move at about the same speed, so it’s impossible, in one action, for any one creature to gain any ground on another. And adjusting speeds is another specialized skillset. Further, creatures gain no advantage for being evasive. That is to say, if you are fleeing, full tilt, you are just as vulnerable to ranged and magical attacks as if you are standing still.

I can't say I disagree with him.