D&D 5E Unconscious PC's and smart monsters

[Maxperson]

Taking a hostage who is dying isn't necessarily all that smart. Their allies may decide that killing the bandit is the most expeditious means to save the ally (since the hostage could easily expire during negotiations).

A readied action to kill the hostage if the party becomes hostile will make that a bit problematic.

Alternately, a simple healing word spell can pull the hostage out of the danger zone (even if the bandit has a readied action, those go off after the triggering action, meaning that the worst thing that happens is the ally is back at zero).

Or dead. If the PC has a single death save failed, the healing word fails. It doesn't work on a corpse.

The party could also promise to let the bandit go, but then kill him anyway. If the bandit tries to take the hostage with them, there's almost even odds that the hostage will die anyway, making it a poor choices for the PCs.

This is a possibility for sure.

Lastly, if they're the more mercenary sort of adventurers, they may welcome the opportunity to split the treasure with one less person. Unless that bandit is familiar with the PCs (in which case he was arguably a fool to fight them) he doesn't know their demeanor.

Maybe, but his sort of group is far rarer than one that actually cares about its members. It's a good bet for the bandit to take.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Really? What's your basis for this.

The thing in the book, right next to the rules for making death saves, where it says the DM is free to apply death saves to an NPC when they see fit.

Disagree. It only creates problems for people trying to use D&D - a gamist game - as a simulation.

D&D has always been, to some degree, a simulation; just as war games are a simulation, which can give meaningful results, because they are fundamentally based in reality. The premise of this thread is to encourage realistic behavior for NPCs. In doing so, treating it as a mere game would be highly counterproductive. Such suggestions do not further the conversation in any way.

 

[CleverNickName]

My solution to this moral quandary might not work for every table, but here goes: I use the Golden Rule.

Early on in the campaign, present the party with a hostile group of low-level NPCs. Maybe they are ambushed by bandits, or have to clean out a cabal of evil cultists, or they have to fight their way through human soldiers working for a necromancer, whatever. It should be something that will challenge the low-level characters a bit, but something they should eventually prevail over. The most important thing is, they should be NPCs...living, breathing people that are just like the player characters, except they have chosen the path of evil.

Then, watch how they treat their defeated NPC opponents. Do they ignore them and move on to the next target? or do they double-tap them to "make sure they are dead" before moving on? Do they tie them up before stabilizing them, and then turn them in to the proper authorities to face justice? Take notes, and ask lots of questions for these first few encounters.

Then, for the rest of the campaign, have intelligent NPCs do the same to the party.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The thing in the book, right next to the rules for making death saves, where it says the DM is free to apply death saves to an NPC when they see fit.

Fair enough, that's how I've operated, but the default state is that you don't.

D&D has always been, to some degree, a simulation; just as war games are a simulation, which can give meaningful results, because they are fundamentally based in reality. The premise of this thread is to encourage realistic behavior for NPCs. In doing so, treating it as a mere game would be highly counterproductive. Such suggestions do not further the conversation in any way.

Almost every post in this thread involves treating D&D as a game, because it involves extensive metagaming, rather than having people behave naturalistically. D&D doesn't do well with naturalistic behaviour. HP are terrible for it for starters.

 

[Fanaelialae]

A readied action to kill the hostage if the party becomes hostile will make that a bit problematic.



Or dead. If the PC has a single death save failed, the healing word fails. It doesn't work on a corpse.



This is a possibility for sure.



Maybe, but his sort of group is far rarer than one that actually cares about its members. It's a good bet for the bandit to take.

You are mistaken. Read the ready action description in the PHB (page 193 iirc). Per RAW, a readied action goes off AFTER the action that triggers it.

IOW, if you can kill the bandit in one shot, the readied action won't go off. Even better, if you use Healing Word, first the hostage heals, and then the readied action triggers (meaning the worst that happens is that the hostage is reduced to 0 hp again).

 

[Oofta]

Yeah but RAW they do die at 0 HP ...

It's not RAW that they die at 0 HP. It's up to the DM as state in the PHB under "Monsters and Death". Usually reserved for special villains of course, but always up to the DM. It's a convenience and a metagame artifact that I don't think should ever make a difference in the behavior of an NPC.

As far as people not fighting to the death ... have you never seen the news? I find it difficult to say this without being insulting, but sadly people fight and die all the time. Frequently about incredibly stupid things.

In any case, as I stated above most fights are over in less than a minute. Frequently in less time than it will take you to read this paragraph. It's not like people in the fight are sitting there analyzing their odds of survival. Again, feel free to run it any way you want as a DM, I just don't buy the "the bad guys should always run away." They don't, they never have.

 

[Maxperson]

Fair enough, that's how I've operated, but the default state is that you don't.

There is no default. The section simply says what most DMs do and then points out some exceptions to what most DMs do. There is no rule for monsters and death at 0. At least not in the PHB.

Almost every post in this thread involves treating D&D as a game, because it involves extensive metagaming, rather than having people behave naturalistically. D&D doesn't do well with naturalistic behaviour. HP are terrible for it for starters.

The game is as simulationist or gamist as you want it to be. D&D is very versatile that way.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Almost every post in this thread involves treating D&D as a game, because it involves extensive metagaming, rather than having people behave naturalistically. D&D doesn't do well with naturalistic behaviour. HP are terrible for it for starters.

There's nothing remotely meta-gaming about Hit Points, or any other game mechanic, if they actually describe how the world works. Meta-gaming would be if you pretend that the world doesn't work a certain way, when it's demonstrably provable otherwise.

 

[Oofta]

You are mistaken. Read the ready action description in the PHB (page 193 iirc). Per RAW, a readied action goes off AFTER the action that triggers it.

Readied action states "you decide what perceivable circumstance will trigger your reaction." You don't have to wait for an action to complete. The circumstance could be "starting to cast a spell".

 

[Maxperson]

You are mistaken. Read the ready action description in the PHB (page 193 iirc). Per RAW, a readied action goes off AFTER the action that triggers it.

No. It goes after the TRIGGER, not the action. The trigger is whatever you say it is. It can be something as simple as, "If anyone in the party begins to move." Then, once someone begins to move, you use your reaction after the trigger, but before the action completes. It's specifically a perceivable circumstance that is the trigger, not necessarily an action.