How do you get your PCs to run away?

[Goblyn]

If the encounter is *obviously* too tough for them then why wouldn't they run? I don't know why this problem doesn't solve itself, except that I guess the DM doesn't like TPKs, in which case I have a good idea why the players don't run in the first place. Players usually have a pretty good instinct about a DMs limitations.

Because the players don't know the monster's stats. What is obvious to the DM is at best cryptic to the players.

The description is all they have to go on. If in the past you've described something in an effective and scary way, and the PCs triumphed, then when again you describe to that effectiveness the players believe they have a chance to triumph.

One other point: seldom in my expereince have any of my or any PC I've seen survive a retreat. Given the observed chance of survival, it's preferable to go down fighting than running and screaming.

 

[Celebrim]

Roleplaying is fun because people can portray brazen heroes capable of amazing feats of daring-do. Players do not want to roleplay yellow-bellied cowards. They are going to stand in the face of danger and spit at it, even if looks powerful and deadly. That's why parties don't run.

Parties like this don't last long in my campaigns. Just because you are a hero doesn't mean you don't choose your battles. Running away is no proof of cowardice. A brave man who runs away from a pointless battle can force the enemy to come to terms with him at a later point, on more favorable ground, when the surprise and preparation favors the cause. Cowardice is when your duty impels you to fight and you know that you should, but you don't anyway.

People who stand in the face of danger and spit at it, are not brave but arrogant, and they deserve what they get. If evil was a push over that would just roll over and die when the first band of would be heroes came along, then someone would have long since wiped it away. My God man, look at the bones!

 

[Herremann the Wise]

If the encounter is *obviously* too tough for them then why wouldn't they run?

Greed for XP, treasure, thinking/hoping that the DM will save them. Deliberately not meta-gaming even: "a mind flayer can do what? He's just a skinny humanoid with tentacles and a hygiene problem!" As well, if the players are not used to making a co-ordinated escape, they generally don't and get slaughtered even worse than if they'd held their ground.

I don't know why this problem doesn't solve itself, except that I guess the DM doesn't like TPKs, in which case I have a good idea why the players don't run in the first place. Players usually have a pretty good instinct about a DMs limitations.

Perhaps the DM does not like repeatedly handing out TPK's to "dumb" players? Sometimes like a gambler, the players can't help themselves thinking that the possible rewards will be worth it. C3PO: "But the chances of successfully navigating an asteroid field are approximately..."
Players: "I don't care! We're fighting it"

Usually it depends on what type of DM the players are used to playing with. If you're going to change your style, I guess you need to let the players know.
If you were yelling at them last week that the game was moving too slowly when they checked for traps every five feet, and this week you want to take them through the Tomb of Horrors, you have a problem.

Traps are their own issue. Traps randomly scattered in a room without treasure are the best way of slowing a dungeon crawl to a virtual standstill. I do agree however that consistency from the DM is key. Sometimes though, players simply don't get it.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Celebrim]

One other point: seldom in my expereince have any of my or any PC I've seen survive a retreat. Given the observed chance of survival, it's preferable to go down fighting than running and screaming.

This is what I call training your players to take TPKs. If you always present the PC's with situations in which retreat is unviable, pretty soon they will stop treating it as an option for the very good reason that the DM has never made it a viable option. If you've done this, about the only thing you can do is a DM is a) let the party die, or b) secretly reduce the foes hit points and let them off the hook. Neither is particularly satisfying.

I can't count the number of fights my PC has run away from or avoided. The main trick in a retreat is to retain party cohesion, and not turn it into a rout in which every character is for themselves. Generally speaking, monsters are no better at fighting a moving action than parties are better at fighting a movie action. In fact, against single big monsters, a moving action can greatly advantage the PC party. After all, the parties biggest advantage against most foes is that they can generate more actions per round than the monster can.

But you must all so plan a party with the idea, 'What are we going to do if we get in over our heads?' If the party has given all its thought to maximizing damage output and none to mobility, then sure, retreat is probably impossible and you are better off slogging it out to the last man. If on the other hand your party has spells like 'Wall of Force', 'Teleport', 'Expeditious Retreat' and items/mounts chosen specifically to help you move when you need to, then you are rarely going to be caught in situations you don't want to be in with no way to get out of them. Also, be sure to retreat along areas you've already explored so as to not make your problems worse.

I tend to design my PC's with the goal of maximum (party) survivability, and the ability to deal massive damage to a foe is only part of that.

 

[S'mon]

My PCs ran away from a black dragon in my Lost City of Barakus game yesterday - 3rd level PCs, they didn't need any encouragement! They had previously stayed to fight 2 wights they could have retreated from though, & 1 PC took 2 negative levels. I think if the GM describes the threat as overpowering, players will usually retreat, if they don't, tough luck. I described the PCs coming out into the underground cave, the deep rumbling sound of the dragon's roar, its bulky form coming from one of the side caves - PCs scarpered ASAP; only 2 got acided.

 

[pogre]

Alas, I once faced a similar problem - a few TPKs took care of it

Seriously, I do not hesitate to say things like You sense this opponent may be too much for you or something similar. I like folks to have at least a heads up that they are going against a very tough/potentially deadly encounter. Subtle does not work for us - it just doesn't.

 

[MonsterMash]

Roleplaying is fun because people can portray brazen heroes capable of amazing feats of daring-do. Players do not want to roleplay yellow-bellied cowards. They are going to stand in the face of danger and spit at it, even if looks powerful and deadly. That's why parties don't run.

My PCs ran away from a black dragon in my Lost City of Barakus game yesterday - 3rd level PCs, they didn't need any encouragement! They had previously stayed to fight 2 wights they could have retreated from though, & 1 PC took 2 negative levels. I think if the GM describes the threat as overpowering, players will usually retreat, if they don't, tough luck. I described the PCs coming out into the underground cave, the deep rumbling sound of the dragon's roar, its bulky form coming from one of the side caves - PCs scarpered ASAP; only 2 got acided.

Not all parties are that foolish not to run IMO, as S'mon says last session the party ran into a Black Dragon, which we beat a very hasty retreat from as the cleric didn't have resist energy as a spell and we've got five level 3 characters so we might be able to beat a very young dragon we weren't hanging about to see how big it was and get killed in the process.

 

[S'mon]

It was about 10'+tail - seemed bigger to you, though.

Edit: I agree players want to play heroes, and should have the chance to do so. Always running from everything would be no fun. The true warrior knows when to fight & when not to fight though, and chooses his fights with care. a pointless fight leading to a useless death is not heroic. Holding the bridge to give your companions time to flee while you stand alone against the enemy host, that's heroism.

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

I've noticed a particular 'DnD mindset' that causes players not to have their characters run.


It did used to confuse me a little:

Had a Shadowrun group. These guys were properly sneaky, took pains never to get involved in a fair fight... Would generally withdraw at the first sign of serious opposition or a protracted firefight.

With the DnD group, it seemed to be a full out charge at anything in front of them. Might consider withdrawing if they'd taken over 50% casualties. There were a few situations where they'd run, but only if obviously completely outclassed, i.e. like S'mons Black Dragon vs 3rd level parties. Even then, a couple of them would adopt a 'we could have had it, if you wern't so cowardly' attitude.

Problem was, it was exactly the same group of players. And it was getting to be a problem as the casualty rate in DnD was skyrocketing and players weren't happy.


Getting to the bottom of it, there's a lot of what LeapingShark said. In DnD, that group plays good aligned parties with a tendancy towards altruism and bravery. Running from anything that isn't obviously and overwhelmingly powerful sat badly with them.

Bearing in mind this is what they want out of DnD, I work towards providing it. I aim for a heroics campaign theme. Most challenges are beatable. If I intend them to run from something, I'll make it very obvious. Failing that, I use fate points, so TPKs aren't quite as bad as they could be.

Games have been much more enjoyable when we're all playing with the same expectations in mind.


As a player, our DM always uses such hideous encounters that the 'Brave Sir Robin' reflex is now thoroughly ingrained into us. He killed us all a whole bunch of times, but the lesson has been learned! I guess he might find it a little frustrating, as I'm sure we've fled a fair amount of beatable stuff... Although I'd view it as conserving resources by avoiding fights that aren't 110% necessary - sounds much braver that way.

 

[Darkness]

Perhaps the DM does not like repeatedly handing out TPK's to "dumb" players? Sometimes like a gambler, the players can't help themselves thinking that the possible rewards will be worth it. C3PO: "But the chances of successfully navigating an asteroid field are approximately..."
Players: "I don't care! We're fighting it"

This is a logic problem. It can be solved, though.
Let's look at it first. Assumptions that need to be true for it to work:

1. Defeat generally means TPK.
2. TPK means that the campaign crashes. ('Crashes' - not necessarily 'dies.')
3. The DM doesn't want the campaign to crash.

All this taken together means the DM doesn't really want the party's defeat (except in the "end battle," maybe). Which, by itself, is not necessarily a problem. But if she then goes and fudges things so the PCs survive as a result and the players figure it out, this problem can occur - i.e., they don't retreat because they know the DM (probably?) won't let them die.

Now, personally, I would slaughter such players for meta-gaming alone. Though that's obviously not what the DM for whom these assumptions are true wants.
So how to fix it?

A lot of people will suggest you should just kill them. Which is a perfectly valid approach, if you're fine with that kind of thing.
Me, I'd instead alter a basic assumption. Namely, the assumption that defeat usually means death for the entire party (and thus, campaign crash). Change death for all to "death only for those who can't be saved at all - and for the rest, imprisonment, torture, and losing all equipment" and suddenly, a defeat is a setback rather than a campaign crash.
If that doesn't seem harsh enough, make sure their captured magic items will be shipped to the dark lord's castle (or similar setting of the campaign finale)/destroyed/sold/whatever so quickly after their defeat that their chances to get them back before they're lost (almost) forever are ca. 50:50.
In summary, this means a defeat doesn't end your campaign - which in turn means you can let the PCs lose. Which means they have an incentive to consider retreat an option because if they don't, they will lose (and likely lose all their stuff - which should scare even meta-gamers).

Though in case you aren't even willing to live with setbacks, I can't help you.