Scare them into submitting

[Luce]

Do enemies always fight to the death? Some thoughts through editions and my experiences. As the title says i only cover the putting the fear in them aspect. By all means try Diplomacy first if you wish or sneak around if you can.



Second edition has Morale rules. Lists of check triggering events is presented (25% of attacking force lost, facing a superior force,... etc). The DMG speaks of not having to defeat each monster giving an example that it is at least if not greater achievement to convince the pillaging dragon to move on, rather then chop him into dragonburgers.
My Experience: I run mostly modules during my short time playing. If the adventure told me to check Morale I did, but neither me nor my players tried to use those rules most of the time.


Third Edition. The Intimidate Skill. “Make a bully back down” Target 10+HD (+fear modifiers)
My experience: There was a summer during which my regular group was busy with work, classes life in general. So I got a two, new to the hobby, person team that did not mind experimenting with in the rules. One player had gotten the Savage Species for cheap and played a monster character (Moon dog). The other, with my help, build a character build around the intimidation rules (Fighter/Sorcerer/Tainted Warrior [PrC from Dragon 302]). In play it work to everyone's satisfaction, the PC were durable but not very suited for prolonged combat. In fact they were a bit underpowered in that aspect. The duo modus operandi consisted in getting in and out fast fighting only what they must, that is things that could not charm or scare away. It became a game within the game for them to disguise themselves (change self, hat of disguise) and hype up their own reputation. They have a fearsome reputation, because they leave survivors. ("To the Pain!”). Well, not really. The campaign really played on misinformation and how rumors are generated. As one the players even put it (in character) “You try to intimidate one lesser demon and suddenly everybody things you torture major ones for fun!” (and yes it did earn him a RP reward, he said it with such indignation...)


Fourth edition. Intimidate skill as well. “Force bloodied target to surrender” can be used against a group, with individual checks.
My experience: So far I have not run or played in a situation where a PC had taken advantage of this. But reading through the Essentials warlock, Hexblade with Infernal pact, it seems that it is feasible to build a character who is good at making enemies surrender.


Potential positives: spice out encounters, players do not always have to take the bloody and choppy way of conflict resolution. Overall time spend on individual combat can be shorten reducing the feeling of “grind”. Interacting with prisoners makes them feel more real (immersion)


Negative: Players may start trying this every time in hope that they will roll that twenty with little to loose. If the retreating enemies take (most) their stuff with them the party may become underpowered from equipment standpoint.



The way I handle it: A win is a win, the party gets the experience. Pre-combat intimidated creatures with try to move out (and take most of their possessions) and depending on their nature may go get couple of their friends or go warn the big bad. After all while they are scared of the PC they are working/living where they are found for a reason. In other words either it is their home or they are following somebody more powerful from respect or fear.
Also such behavior will not make you many friends. Intimidated creatures are usually hostile towards the PCs regardless of the check outcome. Though I have thrown the “unwanted followers” situation couple of times- “You pwned big boss! Now you big boss!.” It makes sense in cultures where personal power is the qualifier of leadership. ( [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WtL3Wpcp7I[/ame]
)

On the mechanical side I try to curb the over optimization, taking a feat to help you with this is OK this is after all the particular character shtick, taking an unbalanced magical item ( 3.5 Crystal Mask of Dread (+10 to Intimidate checks) is not.


What are your experiences and views?

 

[the Jester]

My answer is the same for my milieu, regardless of the edition or system I'm running:

No, the monsters don't always fight to the death. Kobolds, wererats, xvarts and goblins are notoriously cowardly. In fact, the first session of my homebrewed D&D version, the pcs won initiative against a band of goblins, slew half of them before the goblins got to act- and the remaining goblins broke and ran.

I don't always require any checks from the pcs- if the monsters panic and break, they panic and break. OTOH if they don't, the pcs may still be able to try to panic and break them via skill use, etc.

 

[PaulofCthulhu]

No, that is what Morale is for.

In historical warfare only c.10-15% of any side may be lost before a decision to surrender was made. Further casualties were either the result of later death (by infection due to battle wounds) or slaughter by the victors (e.g. Battle of Towton - the bloodiest on English soil).

Monsters have feelings too!

 

[Stormonu]

Prior to 3E, I used the morale rules, but never really like them; there were times enemies who panicked too easily and ran when as a DM I'd have preferred they stay and fight, other times the reverse. It galled my narrative senses, basically.

In 3E , I had the power to make the opposition run or stay as I felt. I would occassionally have NPCs break and run, when I felt it was appropriate.

When I came across the rule for Intimidate in 4E for forcing an opponent to surrender when below half hp with a sucessful check, I thought it was a wonderful idea. No longer would NPCs turn tail when I chose it, now PCs could influence such a trigger. I've adopted it into my Pathfinder game, though I'm watching it for any abuse.

I don't have any problem anymore with awarding full XP for defeating opponents without having to kill them. A win is a win, whether by brain or brawn. Overall, I think D&D would do well to move away from individual XP award per monster. It only enforces the "kill everything" mentality the game has promoted for too long.

 

[NewJeffCT]

I just did that in a recent encounter for my players. The campaign i'm running started with 3 quick encounters of a goblin raid on a small town. As the players were just starting out and all first level, it was pretty challenging in the end, but milestones/action points were a big help in helping overcome the goblin raiders. (And, at the end, when the town guard arrived, the goblins broke and ran...)

But, just to show them how far they had progressed (they're level 6 now), I put those 3 encounters into one big goblin encounter (level 5 encounter overall, I think) and had the goblins waylay them on the way back from a big showdown. This time, the PCs took out the goblin leader and a few other key goblins by the time the first round was over. Then, when the goblins went, a good portion of them broke & ran. The players won and barely broke a sweat... without a strong leader, the goblins ran. And, I always award full XP for the encounter if the players "win", even if 2/3 of the goblins ran away in terror, or if they had intimidated the goblins into leaving the lands or whatever. It isn't just based on the number of kills.


I have always used morale as a DM. However, as a campaign gets past its mid-point, the bad guys are less likely to run as they were early in a campaign or be forced into surrender. The bad guys are fighting for something/somebody (the BBEG or some other tyrannical master or mistress) that they hopefully believe in and will fight to the death for it/him/her. After all, if the BBEG is powerful enough, the fanatics might think if they fight valiantly enough, they could be brought back via Raise Dead/Resurrection by said BBEG.

In my last campaign, the PCs ended up attacking the BBEG in the heart of his evil theocracy - I told them ahead of time (though, they probably already knew it) that since they were in the high temple of this evil deity, the world capital of this religion, they should expect every bad guy there to be so fanatical that they'll fight to the death without question.

(On a side not, just remembered that I did have a level 18 lich archmage leave a combat for a round via a Quickened dimension door (or maybe a contingent one?) so it could heal up in safety, then return to combat the following round knowing that the PCs would also heal up, too...)

I do like the idea of forcing a bloodied foe to surrender - however, I would also add in the monster level to the DC for 4E as well as the +10 for it being a hostile encounter. I don't think it should be easy to force surrender as you get up higher in level.

 

[Luce]

NewJeffCT: I do not wish to get too much particularly focus on one edition,as i see the phenomena to be general. But just for argument sake. Dragonborn ot drow (+2 to Intimidate and +2 Char) Hexblade with infernal pact (there is second level utility encounter power (wrathful aspect) that gives you +5 to Intimidate until the end of your next turn). So second level you can have 5(from tranining) + 1(1/2 level)+5 (from Char 20) +2(race) +5(encounter power) =18 for a round (13 otherwise). Also did not include the skill focus feat (+3) or items but that much start to go over the optimization line in my book. My DMG1 gives the helpful guidance other defenses are around 12+ level for monsters. At higher levels, again if you are making the character the parties Intimidator, there are items like the hideous weapons (AV2) to aid the check. Again not a sure fire way to deal with anything, but gives you a chance even against elites and for most regulars there is better then 50% chance. Which makes it a worthy use of standard action. Especially if at least one adventuring companion does aid another action. Also when you are trying to stop a fight from breaking the attitude may not always be hostile (just unfriendly).
I do not mean this to discuss a "weakness" in the rules, allowing the players to beat/brake the game, just a different approach to conflict resolution. It is in the rules, after all.

 

[Starfox]

I simply use a system where losing your last hit means you are out of the fight- down, broken morale, running, pinned, dead - for mooks it really does not make much of a difference. This lets me avoid most of the morale issue.

 

[WHW4]

When running, I sincerely try to get into the monsters head. What are they after? How much is worth to them?

For an animal protecting its young or a mated pair of dragons, it may be a fight to the death scenario. For a band of goblins looking for an easy snatch and grab, if a few of them died horribly and quickly they'd probably cut their losses and retreat. It's all about risk/reward.

Animals generally also don't fight to the death barring specific scenarios (crazed, diseased in some way, protecting young as mentioned above); evolutionarily speaking, why would they? It makes no sense biologically. You can't pass your genes on if you're dead.

For intelligent/quasi-intelligent monsters an example: You attack what to your band-leader looked like a caravan composed of four armed individuals and a couple merchants. You number 20. Yes, we should attack. Twelve seconds later, Glubnub the Wise is decapitated by the big man with an axe, and four of your friends on the right flank were engulfed in a fireball and lay burning in the grass. Marines, we are LEAVING!

Evil leaders may throw their mooks at an enemy without care for losses, but barring some sort of mind control or a "greater fear of coming back empty handed," they also would break and run without extreme discipline. Hobgoblins make tenacious foes in that regard. Only a deep-seated sense of honor or duty to the cause or an intense, irrational hatred of the foe would keep someone fighting a losing battle - but this is usually reserved for the HEROES of the story (your group).

 

[Elf Witch]

When I run a game no matter the setting or edition I play the NPCs in a way that makes sense.

So depending on why the NPCs are attacking I decide if they will fight to the death.

If they break and run I give the players full XP. I don't base XP on killing things but on how they handle an encounter. If they use diplomacy or intimidate to handle an encounter instead of fighting they get full XP.

 

[S'mon]

I sometimes use Basic D&D's 2d6 morale check, whatever the edition. This is for group[s of foes. Other times I'll play a monster according to its personality and have it decide to flee. Eg on Sunday (Vault of Larin Karr) when the PCs were massacring the Crushed Skull Orcs and the Wizard's stinking cloud had killed around 40 of them, a Hobgoblin ally of the Orcs decided to bug out, whereas the Orc Chief Kersux fought to the death alongside his warriors.