D&D General Do You Play Out Every Combat?

[ezo]

If I don't play it out, it isn't combat... it is just a story-beat.

 

[kigmatzomat]

We tend to run things down to the end, but it's not my preference - it's because our group HATES letting anyone get away! They'll ignore helping friends (like, PCs making death saving throws) if it means chasing down that lone goblin and making sure he's dead, lol. I don't get it but they find it fun, so /shrug

Sounds like it's time for delayed action poison.

Use cavalry or maybe variant manticores to volley at the PCs then flee in different directions, splitting up repeatedly. They continue firing arrows as they go. After 2 rounds of being peppered with poison arrows and everyone running in different directions, have them make saves where the DC is increased by each poisoned arrow that hit them. Some PCs will fail and if they don't get help, let them die.

Then have the fallen be looted and possibly eaten by the monsters.

 

[bloodtide]

Even if it’s a sandbox game?

Yes, not sure why that would matter?

 

[Lanefan]

To the question posed by the thread title: yes, every time.

Why? Because in our system even the most trivial of combats hold the potential for long-lasting consequences.

An example from three or four sessions ago: party is on a small-ish ship anchored in a bay. During the night four marine ghouls crawl aboard and attack. Given the party's level and capabilities this is a pushover combat even though some of them are asleep, out of armour, etc.; and yet I played it out in full anyway because if someone fumbles and throws their expensive magical weapon over the side its recovery (which would have to wait till daylight) will a) cause a delay and b) leave them exposed not all that far from the pirate town they're en route to attack.

 

[payn]

To the question posed by the thread title: yes, every time.

Why? Because in our system even the most trivial of combats hold the potential for long-lasting consequences.

An example from three or four sessions ago: party is on a small-ish ship anchored in a bay. During the night four marine ghouls crawl aboard and attack. Given the party's level and capabilities this is a pushover combat even though some of them are asleep, out of armour, etc.; and yet I played it out in full anyway because if someone fumbles and throws their expensive magical weapon over the side its recovery (which would have to wait till daylight) will a) cause a delay and b) leave them exposed not all that far from the pirate town they're en route to attack.

Yowzer, not only stooge inducing fumbles are used here, but such that a PC tosses their weapon overboard…

 

[Lanefan]

It's funny that I'm more than willing to just end a combat where I see no point in the NPC's continuing- usually when combats go south, most NPC's will attempt to flee, which seems to annoy players more than simply fighting to the death, so it's probably better this way.

On the other hand, if things go south for the players, I continue to play it out. To my continued surprise, the players tend to succeed even if things go horribly bad for them, so even if it's become a sloggy mess that's going to take hours to resolve, I want to give them every chance.

I've been saying this for decades: adventuring parties (as opposed to individual characters) are the most resilient things the universe has ever invented.

This goes back to an early game I tried to run- the players had attempted to rob a merchant, it went south, the guards showed up, and I looked at the odds and said "you were captured." Then I narrated them being marched out of town and executed. The players were very upset, saying I'd robbed them of the ability to play out their deaths- deep down, they felt that they had a chance, no matter how slim, of eluding capture and death.

Yep, and as a player I'd feel the same way. If I'm going down, let me go down fighting.

To date, I can't recall ever having a full TPK, but characters have died, and I once had someone walk out of the game and my apartment because their character had died in a combat, and they didn't see it resolving any time soon. So there's problems with playing things out, but I know if I gave my players a choice about a fight they are losing, they'd want to play it out every time. And that I've never heard anyone gripe about a combat I cut short because they were winning.

In 41 years I've had one TPK; and someone who walks out because their character died fair and square can just keep on walking, as they ain't coming back.

 

[Lanefan]

Yowzer, not only stooge inducing fumbles are used here, but such that a PC tosses their weapon overboard…

A fairly common result on our fumble table is "weapon thrown [either up to 10 feet or up to 20 feet] in a random direction". Normally, this is a triviality; after the combat you just go and pick it up if someone hasn't already kicked it back to you. But if it happens while fighting on a small ship or a clifftop or near lava etc. it can represent a much bigger headache if the random direction roll is unlucky.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Yes, not sure why that would matter?

It contradicts what you are saying about sandboxes - the players of the PCs choose what they want to do.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

So, the 7th level party is traveling through the Goblin Forest and encounters Goblin Warband. The appropriate establishing and reaction rolls are made, and the goblins attack. The gobs have no chance outside of really, really bad rolling on the part of the players. The fight is not part of the main storyline or anything.

Why does the encounter even exist if the goblins have no chance and it's not part of a storyline? My direct answer to your question is that we play out every combat but we would never include a pointless combat like the one you describe. Any time there is a pointless combat (like say a PC goes murderhobo on a helpless civilian or whatever) then that would just be narrated without resorting to dice - in your case I would just go that route

 

[Reynard]

Why does the encounter even exist if the goblins have no chance and it's not part of a storyline? My direct answer to your question is that we play out every combat but we would never include a pointless combat like the one you describe. Any time there is a pointless combat (like say a PC goes murderhobo on a helpless civilian or whatever) then that would just be narrated without resorting to dice - in your case I would just go that route

Because that's what the results of the exploration roll said. I getbthat some people curate every little aspect of their game, but I don't. First, it would exhausting. Second, it would be boring.