The Player Psychology of Fleeing Villains

[Janx]

If the players are in a scenario where it's reasonable for the bad guys to do this, they should know it. If a PC dies in his sleep because he didn't take precautions when he knew assassins might come after him, then that's the player's fault, not the DM's.

Personally, I would find setting up an assassination against a PC a bit of a grey area to arbitrate.

what level is the assassin? Why not hire Artemis Entreri to take out the level 6 PC?

Was the party made aware that enemies were seeking them out? If not, the party is not likely on their guard, sleeping in shifts, etc.

What method of murder will be used? A direct throat slice at night at least means the GM has to make some sneak checks, and a CDG roll, so if he picked a fair CR, then its a fair encounter. If he chose poison, why wouldn't the assassin take a job as a waiter at the inn, and keep poisoning the PC's food until he dies.

In which case, the only chance the PC has is to know to check for poison because he's heard there's a threat, and to make his save vs. poison roll.

Unlike an straight up combat encounter, where the PCs could try to talk, or runaway or something clever, the assassination attempt is pretty much a surprise, no matter what the PCs do.

If a dragon running away gets a group mad, cacking a PC with an assassin is going to get you charged with railroading at the GM Tribunal of Justice.

 

[Quickleaf]

[MENTION=6670929]Havrik Stoneskimmer[/MENTION]
Was this furrowed eyebrows and glares at you of the chummy "damn you DM" variety? Or was it genuine game interfering anger? If the latter, that seems an unusual reaction for players to have...unless there's more to this story...

What were circumstances leading up to and during fight? Any other reasons why they might be upset?

It sounds like your party is the classic fighter, thief, cleric, and mage. In which case during a fight against a flying foe the fighter and thief are *probably* going to have a harder time finding effective ranged attacks. Fortunately if that's true there are easy things you can do as DM to give them more options.

Has this group ever been trounced bad like this before? Has the play style up to this point favored the PCs such that failure or TPK wasn't a real possibility?

Have they ever dealt with a fleeing enemy before? For example, if you fudged something in the past to help a villain escape they might hold a grudge and suspect you of "cheating."

Have they ever fought a dragon in the open before? That's probably one of the most important points, especially as this was their first solo fight. Dragons are fearsome opponents. Green dragons, in particular, are cunning deceivers who never fight fair and try to set up pitches battles - it's their nature.

IMO a good fight with a green dragon should...

Have at some point a dialogue with the dragon so it can tempt one or more PCs, setting up a betrayal by an NPC, or tricking the PCs into a death trap and gloating/sword-point negotiating with them.

Use of flyby attacks that channel PCs toward a dangerous obstacle, flushing them from cover like rabbits, even grabbing PCs to carry them up and drop them...preferably among it's minions who can stabbity stab, or on top of another PC

Ideally set up a complicated situation where the PC become unwitting architects of their own doom...at least at first. For example, the PCs in order to pass through a dungeon room filled with dense poison gas activate drain gates which allow the gas to seep out of the room into caverns below. And the caverns below just happen to be the green dragon's lair and treasure horde. Oh wait it resists poison! And the gas is dense so it clings just above head height. Poor adventurers.

And finally provide a character flaw for the dragon the PCs can exploit. For example, many green dragons can't resist a challenge of wits like a riddle contest or a deadly game of hide and seek.

Btw, I usually tweak dragons to give them extra powers to avoid stun lock, to take advantage of their grab attacks, to change their resistances into something more like the volcanic dragon, make them scarier when bloodied, and give them a signature "predatory" power by color. In a word, my version of your fight *probably* would have been tougher.

 

[Corathon]

So what do you all think? Is it the duty of every DM to let a tough villain taunt the PCs and escape to hound them another day? Deep down inside, is this a delicious sort of agony for the players? Or did I just destroy everyone's enjoyment of tonight's game?

Its the duty of the DM to play the NPC villain according to his abilities and personality. Some fanatical or arrogant foes will fight to the death, but most will try to escape if defeat seem certain. Smart/wise foes will have prepped an escape route ahead of time, while villains with less on the ball will just wing it.

It is NOT the duty of the DM to make sure that the villain escapes.The DM is the (hopefully) fair referee, favoring neither the villain nor the party. If the players block that planned escape route, or just get a lucky shot and kill the fleeing villain with a back attack, missile attack, or spell, good for them! If not, when the villain returns, the party's eventual victory (if it happens) will be all the sweeter. There's nothing like finally getting that hated villain that keeps coming back.

If the players are disappointed that a villain got away - good. They should be, particularly if he swears eternal vengeance as he flees. If they get too bent out of shape about it, they should grow up.

 

[Jack7]

It is NOT the duty of the DM to make sure that the villain escapes.The DM is the (hopefully) fair referee, favoring neither the villain nor the party. If the players block that planned escape route, or just get a lucky shot and kill the fleeing villain with a back attack, missile attack, or spell, good for them! If not, when the villain returns, the party's eventual victory (if it happens) will be all the sweeter. There's nothing like finally getting that hated villain that keeps coming back.

"Neither a sorrower nor a bender be."

I concur. Do not bend (as referee) in favor of either the villain or the party, and do not mourn if either fails through lack of their own preparation, determination, or craft.

Let each one favor himself if he is willing to make the effort. Then see who wants to win the worst, or survive the most.

 

[was]

players hate losing kills..i think using it as a recurring villain is a great idea..love it when the players really hate the bad guy

 

[Krensky]

All this right here?
If a someone or something knows it's about to be bested and has the means and opportunity to flee, then of course it's going to get out of there, and if the chance presents itself, it may even toss off a few choice insults on the way out the door. I don't play intelligent or instinctive opponents as stupid without a damn good reason, and to be perfectly blunt, if the players can't handle both smart gameplay and verisimilitude in the setting, then by all means they should go find another referee more interested in their 'collaborative fiction'; in fact, they'd be doing me a King Kong-sized favor if they do.

Now now, every villain fighting to the death like a crazy idiot is not inherent in a more collaborative fiction playstyle.

My games have a goal of fun and a certain amount of shared narrative control and building/taking part in a story.

Any opponent, and especially the villain will only fight to the death if it has a good, story driven reason for doing so. Insanity, possession, it has to defend something, the players have set up circumstances where the opponent can't - or doesn't get a chance to- flee, whatever.

The players need their egos stroked is not one of those reasons.

 

[The Shaman]

The players need their egos stroked is not one of those reasons.

I'm not the guy who needs this explained.

Basically, don't script anything that takes away from the players' sense of achievement if you can help it.

 

[GSHamster]

If you are going to have a villain run away, it might be worthwhile spending a round "setting up the run". I.e. Have the villain try to break free from the PCs, maybe emphasize looking around wildly, throw dust in the PCs faces, maybe start running in the wrong direction, fight more defensively, etc.

(Obviously this doesn't apply to supervillains executing a perfectly thought out escape plan.)

But doing something like this might make running more obvious to the players, gives them a full round to react before the run actually starts. In a turn-based game, it's hard to react to the enemy "starting to run", to choose to let them go or chase them and block the escape. By the time your turn comes around, the enemy has already taken off and has a long headstart.

 

[howandwhy99]

Check post # 26.

I am no one.

How did I miss that?

Good call.

 

[S'mon]

Hopefully Umbran won't think it's edition warring if I say that the long duration of fights in 4e can contribute to player annoyance when the villain flees. This is particularly a problem with Solos; you spend up to 2 hours slogging through their huge pile of hit points, then they run away, and you face the awful realisation that you're going to have to do it All Over Again. I don't think that's a good reason to not have enemies flee, but you do need to be careful with Solos especially and make sure you're being fair to the PCs. Personally I both halve monster hit points and limit flight abilities, so I think I've avoided this. Generally IMCs when the PCs have chased fleeing villains they've been able to catch them.