D&D 5E Ranged party member keeps running off the map

[iserith]

I guess we play D&D totally different. I don't view PCs as pools of HP to be a shared resource. And I don't think every PC has to contribute to every part of the game and am perfectly OK with niche specialization. And I view the contributions mostly from the personality and actions of the PC, not the DPR, or group damage reduction, or any of the other behind the scenes math. That's all secondary.

Cold comfort when the rest of the party is pushing up daisies because you didn't put your character in harm's way to take some of the heat off your allies. Excellent teamwork!

In any case, a secondary consideration is still a consideration, so I guess we don't "play D&D totally different."

 

[Sacrosanct]

Cold comfort when the rest of the party is pushing up daisies because you didn't put your character in harm's way to take some of the heat off your allies. Excellent teamwork!

In any case, a secondary consideration is still a consideration, so I guess we don't "play D&D totally different."

If a player's character concept is that they aren't meant to be up front in harm's way, then I wouldn't expect them to be, and I certainly wouldn't tell them to toss their concept out of the window and fight in melee because their PC didn't lose as many HP as the other PCs. I don't care how many hp other PCs have, how much damage they do, how much damage they reduce, or any of that. I only worry about my PC. Are they an active party member and a player who is engaged? That's what matters. And if my PC dies doing his role while the other PC lives doing theirs, more power to them.

Then again, I'm old school, where I not only don't care, but fully expect a fragile character like the thief to stay out of combat and not inflict nearly as much damage as everyone else because there are parts of the game where the thief will be extremely valuable to the party. In the OP's case, I don't care if that PC never gets attacked if his role is to snipe from distance and do good damage to targets I can't reach. There's a whole lot more to teamwork than "we all need to lose the same amount of HP, and do the same amount of damage each round." There's a reason why HP and AC and damage are individually listed on a character sheet and not part of a group pool.

 

[nswanson27]

Keep in mind too this requires a space where there actually IS that much room to move. Most big-ish fights tend to be in some sort of constrained space. Alternatively, if the setting is forest or hills, at some point I would say "total cover" from natural obstructions.
...I don't know, maybe I just don't see this tactic as being as big of a deal as it's assumed to be.

 

[iserith]

I only worry about my PC.

Go team!

There's a whole lot more to teamwork than "we all need to lose the same amount of HP, and do the same amount of damage each round."

Who said that? Right, nobody. You're arguing against nobody's point.

Anything else?

 

[Sacrosanct]

Go team!

Way to completely ignore the context of that statement (that being the stats other PCs have). That's a huge red flag that you're being disingenuous. To be confirmed by:

Who said that? Right, nobody. You're arguing against nobody's point.

Anything else?

You said it. Right here:

"..you didn't put your character in harm's way to take some of the heat off your allies. Excellent teamwork!"

That certainly reads to me that unless someone sacrifices their own HP, then they are a bad team player.

But since you clearly have no intention of responding to me honestly (as evidenced by your first comment in this quote that completely took me out of context), I am extremely doubtful you'll respond to this one honestly either.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

Not really a problem for me. In the few battles that are outside of dungeons, it's a viable tactic for that player. If my creatures have any means to counter that tactic, they will, if they don't, they will focus on the other PCs. Never tanking any hits might not always be the smartest tactic either. If the players ends up with all hit die left and full HP while the other already used up everything and are half-dead. He might consider tanking the next battle.

I never really enforce anything from my players, but I gentle push them to reconsider their tactics by bringing them into dangerous situations. If their strategy doesn't work out and they almost die, they will have a different tactic next time. The players learn strategies just like their PCs.

 

[iserith]

That certainly reads to me that unless someone sacrifices their own HP, then they are a bad team player.

Not when you read the whole sentence.

But since you clearly have no intention of responding to me honestly (as evidenced by your first comment in this quote that completely took me out of context), I am extremely doubtful you'll respond to this one honestly either.

I don't agree I took you "completely out of context." I think the (whole) sentence I quoted distills your position quite well. I've seen plenty of players in groups that share your sentiment in this regard. I just happen to think it's poor teamwork especially when it leads to certain results.

Speaking of those certain results, I also invite to reread my first post in this thread which, as I hope you will notice, comes with a lot of If's and contingencies that you appeared to read much differently than intended.

We done?

 

[Kobold Boots]

Player enjoyment is important and players do things that they find cool to do.

This player wants to play a sniper. If the only opportunity he or she has to be a sniper is to do so in combats with the rest of the group, then the group should take advantage of it. If it's a group problem then the group needs to discuss it with him in game. If the group isn't having a problem then it's not a problem.

I guarantee you that the first time the party wipes due to not having the gunsmith around, the party will have a problem and will discuss it with him. However, having him run off the map just means you have to keep track of how far off map he is with a counter and put him on the last known location where he exited.

Most of these sorts of issues are self-resolving and it's best not to worry about them. Should you feel it necessary to negatively reinforce the behavior (as others have said) when there are opponents looking to gun them down using the same tactics (e.g when they see several counters on the other side of the map indicating that some sharpshooters are at range 10 beyond edge and trading shots with them.. ) there will be a discussion about civility.

However, perhaps another good idea would be to let players pursue their own subplots. If you have a sniper, give him a sniper mission that supports the team goal. You might be surprised how things like that grow your campaign.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I don't agree I took you "completely out of context." I think the (whole) sentence I quoted distills your position quite well.

My entire paragraph was centered around me not worrying or caring about another PC's stats, and you pulled only "I only care about my PC" and inferred I'm selfish. so yeah, you did take it out of context, and displayed just how intellectually dishonest you are, which you've doubled down on here to boot. So thanks for proving me right I guess, when I said I don't expect you to be honest here either.

Speaking of those certain results, I also invite to reread my first post in this thread which, as I hope you will notice, comes with a lot of If's and contingencies that you appeared to read much differently than intended.

There wasn't a lot of ifs or contingencies. There was one: depends on the game. You flat out said that a player not putting their HP into the group's HP pool to act as a damage sponge, you'd tell them to do so even if it's against their role or concept. So when you make statements like "the party's pool of HP" that tells me we play the game very differently, because you seem to look at the party as a pool of numbers and resources, and I look at the party as a group of personalities and people. I don't even have the concept of "party's pool of HP" because PCs are individuals, and players can play their PCs however they want, and not be told to do something different based on how I want them to play.

We done?

As long as you keep quoting me disingenuously, I am.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

For a while I had a similar situation with a ranged combatant. Sometimes it would make sense that they could just rain destruction from afar. But other times, yes, I would tell the player that they are going to lose line of sight if they go too far back that tunnel, or that the buildings would start giving the enemies increasing amounts of cover. Or sometimes the monsters would come at them from all sides.

I’m a big fan of when my PCs use clever tactics and solutions, but reusing the same exact clever strategy again and again is no longer clever. And I will throw a monkey-wrench to see how they will rise to the occasion.

Sometimes this is appropriate. However environment has a lot to do with it. Unless they are fighting on a featureless plain there will be breaks in line of sight.