Too many TPKs?

[billd91]

With all this talk about being able (or unable) to outrun pursuing monsters, is anybody actually trying to portray the monsters realistically or are we just discussing things as if the DM intends to slaughter the PCs? Are all creatures going to pursue fleeing PCs? No. Some will make use of the opportunity to flee themselves even if they were gaining the upper hand.

And if we are assuming that the DM is just going to kill the PCs with a single-minded fury, why are we really discussion pursuit as an issue? The real issue lies elsewhere and inability to flee is secondary.

 

[S'mon]

So, again, you're back to "Should we try to escape and leave Joe's character behind? Sorry, Joe."

What, does no one want to play the Michael Biehn character anymore?!

Kids today...

 

[S'mon]

... Split ... the ... party?

Moreover, if the monsters are just as fast as you, and you're engaged with them (in close, if not melee, range), how are you going to break line-of-sight?

If you move around a corner, they can, on their turn, move right around the same corner and catch up to you.

If you run you can often be well out of sight with a single double-run turn, away off somewhere in the trees and well off the battle mat. Even if your pursuer can run after you, they can't attack after double-running.

Edit: IMCs you often get scenes where eg the goblin shaman runs for it, only to be brought down with a well-placed arrow in the back just before he can make the tree line, and safety. No one doubts that if he could have made it to the trees, he could have got away. There seem to be some very different presumptions in other campaigns about how pursuit & evasion work.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

If you run

In a straight line?

Moreover, the monsters are usually just as fast as you (if not faster, some of the time). Anywhere you can get to, they can, as well.

Edit: IMCs you often get scenes where eg the goblin shaman runs for it, only to be brought down with a well-placed arrow in the back just before he can make the tree line, and safety.

So running didn't work and he died, anyway? Should've stayed and fought. That'll teach him next time!

No one doubts that if he could have made it to the trees, he could have got away. There seem to be some very different presumptions in other campaigns about how pursuit & evasion work.

Except if, for instance, there's a PC rogue standing next or at least close by the shaman, who double moves into the trees with them. If they've both got 30' movements, then one never really gets farther away from the other. The treeline isn't "safety," it's just the next part of the battlemat - so long as one side is willing to pursue.

And if the PC is, instead of a Rogue, a Monk or a Barbarian or someone with boots of speed or whatnot, they should be able to catch the shaman.

Flip it around, and the scenario works for PCs fleeing from monsters (with the notable alterations that higher-than-30' movement speeds are more common for monsters than PCs, and slower-than-30' movement speeds are pretty common amongst PCs, as well).

With all this talk about being able (or unable) to outrun pursuing monsters, is anybody actually trying to portray the monsters realistically or are we just discussing things as if the DM intends to slaughter the PCs?

Would a bear defending its den allow PCs to flee? Sure.

But consider a group of humans and their lackeys that have invaded the goblins' home, yet again, and this time the goblins have managed to kick the snot out of them so hard, they've turned to run.

Is it more realistic for the CE goblins to let the PCs escape (to most likely come back tomorrow), or run them down (and probably eat them)?

 

[S'mon]

Is it more realistic for the CE goblins to let the PCs escape (to most likely come back tomorrow), or run them down (and probably eat them)?

Since goblins are weak, cowardly, & disorganised I'd expect that they wouldn't be too keen to risk much pursuit of retreating enemies who still posed a threat; they would rather stay to mutilate & loot the corpses of fallen enemies.

BTW I've seen PCs make a successful fighting withdrawal; falling back to a choke point then holding it until the enemy fell back, giving the PCs a chance to get away.

It's certainly possible for a flight attempt to be unsuccessful for a particular PC; what I'm surprised at is the view that it leads inevitably to TPK.

 

[S'mon]

In a straight line?

I run 4e.

 

[nedjer]

Had an absolute ball with a Halloween jellies and the like novelty game l;ast week. Running in all directions along the lines of the Keystone Cops with players skillfully delaying the inevitable. It was pretty much Scooby Doo, but could as easily have been done as Rorke's Drift. There's much fun in running away sometimes.

 

[Ranes]

Since goblins are weak, cowardly, & disorganised I'd expect that they wouldn't be too keen to risk much pursuit of retreating enemies who still posed a threat; they would rather stay to mutilate & loot the corpses of fallen enemies.

Plus, the defenders may be under orders not to leave the dungeon/area or not to enter the forest, cross the bridge or whatever the landmark may be. There are plenty of things a DM can do to reign in the actions of the NPCs or monsters, even if the party initially considers the resulting behaviour surprising or perplexing.

The PCs don't know who's ordering the defenders or what those orders are. This gives the DM considerable leeway in handling pursuit of a fleeing party.

There are plenty of other tricks at the DM's disposal. The sudden appearance of something more hostile to the pursuers than the party can change the dynamic completely. Players may pick up a hint of Deus Ex Machina but they'll be forgiving, more often as not, if the twist doesn't completely trounce their suspension of disbelief and is entertaining. Such a device is even more likely to earn a favourable response if the players are at least ambivalent about how much they think their PCs deserved to die.

 

[billd91]

Would a bear defending its den allow PCs to flee? Sure.

But consider a group of humans and their lackeys that have invaded the goblins' home, yet again, and this time the goblins have managed to kick the snot out of them so hard, they've turned to run.

Is it more realistic for the CE goblins to let the PCs escape (to most likely come back tomorrow), or run them down (and probably eat them)?

Even then, it can depend on circumstances. If the goblins thoroughly kicked ass, then sure they'll pursue. If they suffered a lot of casualties, maybe they won't. Fleeing in D&D, when not playing particularly adversarially, doesn't need to be all about running faster than the slowest PC or facing an inevitable TPK.

 

[Jhaelen]

Is it more realistic for the CE goblins to let the PCs escape (to most likely come back tomorrow), or run them down (and probably eat them)?

In most cases I'd argue for the former. What if the fleeing pcs are just trying to lead the goblins into a trap or an ambush?

Staying in their easily defensible 'home base' makes a lot more sense than running into an unknown open area.

If the pcs have left behind dying (but not dead) party members, the goblins might even be better off to keep them alive to be able to threaten to kill them should the other pcs return.
Eating prisoners can wait until they feel they're safe again.

Finally, in an ideal situation the DM has a lot more than just the generic basic information about goblins, their alignment and intelligence:
They might have a leader, have motives and goals and be there for a reason other than waiting for pcs to arrive to fight them.