New Staff Blog: Run Away!

[KidSnide]

New blog entry on morale checks:

http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/blog/2012/04/13/run_away!

The entry makes an interesting point. There is real value to the game providing an (optional) objective mechanic to decide whether the monsters should run away or surrender.

-KS

 

[Gryph]

Yes there is. That's why I liked the morale rules in 1ed.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

That contains the single most clueless statement made to date in the series of posts by the team. 4E did not teach people to focus fire. It did precious little to teach them to stop, but the lesson was well in place before 4E was even a distant gleam. Heck, TSR was still going strong when D&D was teaching to focus fire.

There may be good reasons for morale rules. Would be nice to have an article discussing those. I didn't even have the heart to read the poll responses. So I have no idea how those came out this time.

 

[Mattachine]

I understand older-editions morale rules, but they weren't used frequently in AD&D (they weren't in the MM, nor included in monster entries). I agree with the author that they provided good guidelines about what enemies should do.

Morale could be a good rules option, and even could be an "optional option": one could use morale, except in certain circumstances (such as a climactic battle).

On the other hand, in modern game design, I fully expect that if the game has morale rules, there will be feats, spells, items, and other effects that interact with them . . . thus creating the "morale check build". That would be a sad, and predictable, consequence.

 

[KidSnide]

That contains the single most clueless statement made to date in the series of posts by the team. 4E did not teach people to focus fire. It did precious little to teach them to stop, but the lesson was well in place before 4E was even a distant gleam. Heck, TSR was still going strong when D&D was teaching to focus fire.

Oh, come on. 4e absolutely teaches people to focus fire. Just because focusing fire didn't originate in 4e doesn't mean that 4e doesn't teach it.

My 3rd grade teacher definitely taught multiplication. I am confident that she was not the first to do so.

-KS

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Oh, come on. 4e absolutely teaches people to focus fire. Just because focusing fire didn't originate in 4e doesn't mean that 4e doesn't teach it.

My 3rd grade teacher definitely taught multiplication. I am confident that she was not the first to do so.

And I'm sure that no one talking about your 3rd grade teacher ever expressed that fact in a way that suggested her so teaching was novel.

So ok, I'll grant that is might have been a thought expressed with poorly chosen words instead of an indication of cluelessness.

 

[Andor]

I understand older-editions morale rules, but they weren't used frequently in AD&D (they weren't in the MM, nor included in monster entries). I agree with the author that they provided good guidelines about what enemies should do.

They weren't? I seem to recall them from the AD&D MM, but my books are not readily available.

At any rate, yes. Morale rules are good. Even if the GM never makes a roll, there is rich information in reading that kobolds have an 18 morale and thus tend to fight to the end while goblins have a 12 and are thus cowardly little buggers who will scarper when things look bad.

 

[Dragoslav]

I never played older editions with morale checks, so how did they decrease the necessity of focus-fire tactics? Seems to me that you would still want to focus fire. In the Total War RTS series, one of the first tips the game always gives you is to concentrate fire on a single unit so that it flees, reducing the morale of nearby units and beginning a cascade of retreat.

 

[Starbuck_II]

I understand older-editions morale rules, but they weren't used frequently in AD&D (they weren't in the MM, nor included in monster entries). I agree with the author that they provided good guidelines about what enemies should do.

As I have the books, I know you are fibbing/misinformed.

They are in the AD&D 2nd edition books. Which AD&D are you referring to?

 

[Thaumaturge]

At any rate, yes. Morale rules are good. Even if the GM never makes a roll, there is rich information in reading that kobolds have an 18 morale and thus tend to fight to the end while goblins have a 12 and are thus cowardly little buggers who will scarper when things look bad.

I was going to XP you for this, but I agree with you too oft it seems.

Anyhoo... This.

I never rolled morale in 2nd, so I thought I wouldn't miss it in 3e or, later 4e. But I did miss it, because I had to infer from other sources the bravery or cowardly nature of individual monsters. Having a number is great short hand for the DM who wants the information, and takes little space (in the books or design-wise) for those who don't.

Thaumaturge.