D&D (2024) The Problem with Healing Powercreep

[MerricB]

Here is the relevant rule, from Gygax's DMG p 70:

Breaking Off From Melee:​

At such times as any creature decides, it can break off the engagement and flee the melee. To do, however, allows the opponent a free attack or attack routine. This attack is calculated as if it were a rear attack upon a stunned opponent.​

Note that "Attack Routine" does not mean a level 14 fighter can attack twice when an opponent flees. A level 14 fighter has two "attack routines" per round, each "attack routine" being a single attack (or grapples, etc.) (See DMG pages 62-3).

Claw+Claw+Bite for an animal is an attack routine. (See the dragon entries, which have text like "The attack of a gold dragon can be a claw/claw/bite routine...")

A hasted animal could use their attack routine twice - but not then do a double claw/claw/bite routine against a fleeing foe.

Cheers,
Merric

 

[pemerton]

Note that "Attack Routine" does not mean a level 14 fighter can attack twice when an opponent flees. A level 14 fighter has two "attack routines" per round, each "attack routine" being a single attack (or grapples, etc.) (See DMG pages 62-3).

Claw+Claw+Bite for an animal is an attack routine. (See the dragon entries, which have text like "The attack of a gold dragon can be a claw/claw/bite routine...")

Yes, I've known this since 1984!

 

[pemerton]

It's different from the majority; it doesn't have to be better or worse, and how popular a style of play happens to be is irrelevant.

Irrelevant to what? It's not irrelevant to whether or not the 5e design choices are reasonable ones for a commercial publisher to make.

The question here isn't whether or not you would like it (I think we can safely claim you wouldn't)

I suspect that I adjudicate more fleeing from hostile encounters, in my current FRPGing, than most D&D GMs, because I'm running a system (Torchbearer 2e) that makes resolving flight and pursuit relatively straightforward.

I don't try to present my preferences for RPGing as normative, though.

or whether or not enough people would support it to suit some corporation's profit "requirements", but rather whether or not such a tactic could work in play. I'm pretty sure it could, with the added personal bonus that such a tactic would make logical sense in many settings.

What do you mean by work in play? I think it's widely accepted that fleeing doesn't work in a lot of contemporary D&D play.

And I'm not sure what you mean by saying that it would make "logical sense". It certainly wouldn't make sense in a setting that is meant to emulate Conan or LotR - in those settings, it is heroism (as expressed distinctively by each author), not expedience, that generally prevails.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Irrelevant to what? It's not irrelevant to whether or not the 5e design choices are reasonable ones for a commercial publisher to make.

I suspect that I adjudicate more fleeing from hostile encounters, in my current FRPGing, than most D&D GMs, because I'm running a system (Torchbearer 2e) that makes resolving flight and pursuit relatively straightforward.

I don't try to present my preferences for RPGing as normative, though.

What do you mean by work in play? I think it's widely accepted that fleeing doesn't work in a lot of contemporary D&D play.

And I'm not sure what you mean by saying that it would make "logical sense". It certainly wouldn't make sense in a setting that is meant to emulate Conan or LotR - in those settings, it is heroism (as expressed distinctively by each author), not expedience, that generally prevails.

You are talking about genre simulation. I am talking about physics simulation. They are quite different, as I know you are aware.

And if fleeing doesn't work mechanically in the game you're playing, maybe change the rules so it can? It's your game.

And I care about game design, not WotC's desire to maximize profits. A game doesn't have to make as much money as official D&D to be commercially viable anyway, so I don't see that as a relevant factor.

 

[pemerton]

You are talking about genre simulation. I am talking about physics simulation. They are quite different, as I know you are aware.

I said nothing about genre. You said that it should make sense in settings, and I pointed to two of the most primordial settings for D&D play.

As far as physical simulation is concerned, I don't have any sound intuitions as to how hard it is to escape from a serious fist fight or from a sword fight, never having been involved in either. That said, my understanding is that D&D generally ignores the impact of numbers on defence, compared to real life; so it would be a bit jarring for it to then make a huge deal of numbers when it comes to the ease of fleeing.

And if fleeing doesn't work mechanically in the game you're playing, maybe change the rules so it can? It's your game.

I'm not sure who this is addressed to. I've had no trouble adjudicating fleeing in any of the games I GM for the past 15 years.

 

[James Gasik]

Interesting - I always somehow missed the bolded bit in the DMG quote.

Making it count as if the fleeing opponent is stunned is IMO a bit much; if nothing else, dexterity should still apply to AC.

The stunned part isn't actually relevant, the reality is you'd lose the Dex bonus to AC anyways because you're turning your back to your opponent:

 

[James Gasik]

Oh and, since my post about fleeing was referring to the 2e rules:

 

[The Sigil]

This. Off the top of my head I can't think of a Conan story where he runs away. Ged does run away from the Gebbeth in A Wizard of Earthsea, but not because he is losing a fight with it.

There is nothing per se better about a fiction that involves fleeing, than one that doesn't. It depends on what sort of fiction we want.

Not saying it's per se "better," but there's a pretty famous moment where fleeing happens in some of D&D's seminal fiction...

"Fly, you fools!"

 

[pemerton]

The stunned part isn't actually relevant, the reality is you'd lose the Dex bonus to AC anyways because you're turning your back to your opponent:
View attachment 380623

The only difference that stunned makes is to change the opponent's bonus to hit from +2 to +4. Rear is sufficient to negate DEX and shield.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Not saying it's per se "better," but there's a pretty famous moment where fleeing happens in some of D&D's seminal fiction...

"Fly, you fools!"

He then proceeds to solo the enemy in mid-air and come back as a hyper angel.