Standing and fighting

[Banshee16]

I think it's a behaviour that arises out of the current combat system. With the tonnes of hit points that characters have, and the low likelihood of higher level characters being killed by regular animals and stuff like that, players often pick fights where none are necessary.

Perhaps if the wound/vitality point system, or the hits system (whatever it's called) from True20, or something like that was used, players would be more cautious.

Also, if the means to raise the dead were less available...

Personally, I haven't had as much trouble with that recently. My players have learned to fear wildlife. They've had characters killed by wildlife of many different types.....to the point that they fear regular animals, but will take on fiends and monsters. For some reason, whenever they face regular animals, the dice seem to roll against them. Characters have died from wolves, tigers, boa constrictors (gnome PC), and a herd of stampeding buffalo.

Banshee

 

[Wolfwood2]

If I were running, all werewolves would be dire ^^

They're nasty, which means they're even worse when you come crawling out of the castle with negative levels, few hit points, almost no spells, etc. Best to kill them now.

Were they in a hurry to get into the castle? Was there a deadline they knew of? Because if worst came to worst, you could kill them, get injured, and wait a day.

I have no idea. I was just responding to your statement that an ordinary pack of wolves might be insufficiently scary to motivate the PCs to run. Like I said, Dire Wolves are the size of horses and incredibly strong.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I've been using the Wild Cohort Template "inappropriately" in my Modern adventures, as the rules for advancing monsters are too unwieldly and they frankly suck, too. My PCs fear dogs, and maybe next session they'll come to fear bears and boars, too.

But IMO, the problem isn't "PC power", it's cues. Virtually every instance in this thread of PCs running away involve obvious cues that the opponent/situation is far more powerful than they can handle and is mysterious, which convince the PCs not to even attempt to attack. (Once the attack has started, it's all over. Running away is extremely hard to do.)

Ordinary wolves, at least, are familiar and not dangerous* and don't make a good cue not to fight. They're also not smart, a trait which applied to ordinary dire wolves, making them easier to beat. If they're unusual wolves, it has to be obvious that they're unusual, and even then, the PCs might see smacking them down as part of solving a mystery. If they're obviously dangerous, the PCs might still see beating them as part of the adventure (eg let's not get sealed in this castle by them). They have to be obviously too dangerous to fight, or it has to be obvious that fighting them will bring some really bad drawback (a serious delay, drawing attention from the BBEG, etc).

More PC psychology: I'm thinking of the Black Cauldron - the book, not the movie. In the book, there are dangerous monsters called "Hunters", basically very powerful soulless men. The heroes are warned of them before they go adventuring. The heroes in the novels run away, which isn't surprising because they're not really warriors. If you told your PCs that, they might try to fight the Hunters the first time just because they want to know how dangerous the Hunters are.

* Not to combat capable people, unless they're caught by surprise. It's kind of hard to give that cue, I guess, except lots of wolf footprints, and even then, wolves rarely attack human(oid)s.

I was just responding to your statement that an ordinary pack of wolves might be insufficiently scary to motivate the PCs to run.

I missed the cue that they were dire. Whoops, I was wrong.

The cue should have been more obvious

 

[Wolfwood2]

Perhaps if the wound/vitality point system, or the hits system (whatever it's called) from True20, or something like that was used, players would be more cautious.

Also, if the means to raise the dead were less available...

It's true enough that a different system will produce different behavior.

I'm not convinced that Raise Dead makes all that much difference, though, because there's one means of "raise dead" that is always available. It's call, "Make a New Character".

If the players decide that frequent character turnover is a price they're willing to pay for fights, well, there's not much to be done.

 

[blargney the second]

Let them have their fight with those wolves. Then bring out the bigger packof even bigger wolves. They'll get the hint eventually.

 

[sniffles]

I know as a player in my experience we don't often run away or hide, unless we're really aware of our inadequacies in that particular situation. If we were put in the situation you describe, Quasqueton, we'd probably stand and fight so the wolves couldn't get to us later. Unless we had some serious time constraint or were severely outmatched or already in bad shape, we wouldn't just walk through the gate and shut it behind us.

As for surrendering, we've very seldom done that either. I think most of my friends look on their PCs as I do, as the heroes of the story, and getting the heroes captured is seen as a very bad thing. In books and movies the heroes often have miraculous escapes, but they don't step on the squeaky floorboard or have trouble figuring out which key fits the lock to their cell door. Invariably in D&D, when you're trying to sneak out you roll low and the guards get a nat 20 on their Listen checks. So players would rather fight to the death than end up captive with all their stuff taken away.

And that's probably another reason players don't like to surrender: it usually means losing some of your hard-earned equipment. If you're running your character as someone who has an ancestral weapon or something of that nature, you've got even more impetus to avoid losing that sword that was a gift from your father. At least if you die and your body is looted you don't have to go home and tell Dad you lost it.

 

[Victim]

Escape is very difficult, in most cases, as mentioned above.

Enemies that you bypass now will often need to be fought later. If the group kills the wolves first, it's easier for them to retreat if needed. Locking yourself in with an unknown danger is smart how? If the group can't deal with the stuff inside, then they're screwed because the wolves will block their retreat.

Also, given that tougher monsters are usually in the deeper areas, a group that can't hack the periphery guarding monsters should serious consider leaving the area.

 

[frankthedm]

I think most monsters are played way too blood thirstily. Just because something can chase after the guys with weapons and armor doesn't mean they will. There are much easier targets.

Then the wizard and monk complain they are being unfairly targeted. My hungry monsters go for the targets that look the easiest. Why bite Mr. Metal Porcupine [spiked full plate] when there is a much softer target nearby.

Let them have their fight with those wolves. Then bring out the bigger packof even bigger wolves. They'll get the hint eventually.

Thats not really how wolves and most pack predator's operate, they converge on they prey all at once and go for the stragglers. Yeah that sucks for PCs, but the fence is right there.

 

[Clueless]

Heh... wow. My group woulda looked at each other - walked behind the gates. Closed them. And whipped out the bows and long range fireballs ...

We don't like leaving anythign behind us that'll get in our way when we retreat. That's what comes from having a loth run your game.

 

[Banshee16]

Then the wizard and monk complain they are being unfairly targeted. My hungry monsters go for the targets that look the easiest. Why bite Mr. Metal Porcupine [spiked full plate] when there is a much softer target nearby.

Thats not really how wolves and most pack predator's operate, they converge on they prey all at once and go for the stragglers. Yeah that sucks for PCs, but the fence is right there.

That's supposed to be one of the disadvantages of being a monk or wizard......if it's ignored, you've got a guy with phenomenal cosmic power, but no downside.

Wizards, in their nice silky robes are a nice tasty snack, which is why animals etc. would likely venture after them. I'm not sure if animals are smart enough to stay away from somebody in armor with a big sword. Do they realize that person isn't a good target? Obviously, after one or two attacks, they might change their mind, and remember the next time not to attack the guy in armor.....but if it's the first instance, I'd think the wolves would try to go after the halfling, thinking he's the baby, even though he's actually the halfling fighter with full plate +4.

At the same time, animals are pretty lethal about their attacks....I think the current D&D system doesn't portray that well enough in some times. Although I do find animals pretty deadly in my game, I think its a statistical anomaly, as the dice just happen to throw bad when the PCs face them. And even that has decreased as the PCs rise into the level 11-15 range.

There was an excellent Dragon article years ago that discussed how to make animals more deadly. Many animals like leopards etc. don't run up and claw an animal to death....they'll go, jump in, bite the throat, and clamp down to suffocate the victim. That's usually enough for many animals, especially with people. Part of the problem is the abstract D&D combat system....the article fixed that by giving animals things like strangle attacks etc. But under the current system, an average character could get, what, 20 rounds of attacks while being strangled, before dying? Doesn't really make the animal very deadly, whereas I think if a person let a leopard or cougar or something get in close in real life, they wouldn't have much chance of survival...at least without suffering horrific injuries.

Banshee