D&D General Why are we fighting?

[tetrasodium]

You really don't need a "morale system". Just have the bad guys run away when it makes sense for them to do so /shrug

However, this is addressed in the video. Having the bad guys run away is an unsatisfying result UNLESS the goal of the combat was something other than "kill all the baddies".

It also avoids the mechanical design expectations of wearing down player resources through encounters if the monsters do. The gm winds up needing to throw our ever escalating encounters capable of soaking the expanding nova duration capacity each time monsters flee without wearing down the pc resources as they are expected to.

 

[Minigiant]

The complete removal of morale since AD&D is a primary reason for this. 5E made a halfhearted attempt, but it's absolutely terrible. Enemies (and NPC allies) should try to run or surrender, or demand the party's surrender if the party is losing badly. This can cut the duration of combat by half, moving it into a social encounter.

The removal of morale as a real tool is a big one.

5e really misses the boat on morale. The DMG morale is weak and really should have been a lot more.

4e at least had bloodied and skill challenges so you had the mechanics to run morale right there.

I mostly copied the TotalWars Wavering/Routing/Shattered leadership mechanic for morale of enemies and hirelings to shorten battles.

 

[Minigiant]

You really don't need a "morale system". Just have the bad guys run away when it makes sense for them to do so /shrug

However, this is addressed in the video. Having the bad guys run away is an unsatisfying result UNLESS the goal of the combat was something other than "kill all the baddies".

Making the bad guys run away is bad if the DM is just "making it happen".

If it's a mechanic the players can understand and character can see then it becomes an alternative win condition.

This is all about alt win conditions really.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I usually solved this problem at my table by:

• Giving the Morale rules seen in the DMG with a basic knowledge of the enemy's goals and motivation.
• Changing all attacks as non-lethal, with the option to finish the enemy when they are defeated.
• Going back to minions (normal attacks but only 1 hp) or (lowest possible HP, increased damage).
• Give the battlefield some Lair Actions (the Fray section of the battlemaps of DL are a good idea)

 

[dave2008]

"To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women"

 

[Andvari]

You really don't need a "morale system". Just have the bad guys run away when it makes sense for them to do so /shrug

However, this is addressed in the video. Having the bad guys run away is an unsatisfying result UNLESS the goal of the combat was something other than "kill all the baddies".

The morale system was just there for the DM's convenience. If he hasn't already figured what the monsters are going to do in the situation, he can let the morale system determine it.

I don't agree that it's unsatisfying to have enemies run or surrender. Perhaps if it's the boss you've been chasing, but not for his underlings. It can feel empowering and also be quite a relief when the party is getting a bit low on resources. And often the players don't have as a mission to kill the specific group of baddies they are currently in an encounter with.

It also doesn't have to be either running or surrendering. It can also be calling for a truce and to negotiate. Just some alternative to fighting to death.

 

[jgsugden]

Ending a fight as soon as you're sure who would win would mean ending almost all fights before they begin. The PCs win 99% of combats in D&D. That being said, there is nothing wrong with ending a fight with a surrender, someoneone fleeing, or just fading to black and saying the monsters are dead.

The second comment is more in line with the stronger solution. The solution I try to use is: Always try to have something meaningful on the line during every round of combat. If the PCs are fighting a scout group of enemies, and the PCs are clearly winning, the battle might shift to trying to prevent any of the enemies from escaping to report back. If th PCs are are fighting a giant crab in a bubble in an underground boiling lake, the PCs may have to contend with keeping the dying creature from popping the bubble and boiling everyone. If the PCs are fighting an insane telepathic creature beneath a bridge in a bandit lair, the creature might barter with them by promising to reveal secrets of the bandits. This is not always possible, but just ask yourself how to keep the fight tense in a way that supports the story.

 

[Andvari]

Ending a fight as soon as you're sure who would win would mean ending almost all fights before they begin. The PCs win 99% of combats in D&D. That being said, there is nothing wrong with ending a fight with a surrender, someoneone fleeing, or just fading to black and saying the monsters are dead.

If it ends when the monsters think the PCs are going to win, you can still save a lot of time.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Folks have complained mightily about resource management. It’s a boring useless part of the game.

The social part is boring is broken. It only includes a few kinds of characters.

Speaking of which, “martials” just suck. They are no fun and cannot do anything.

Exploration is dull and broken. Finally—finally! We know combat sucks too!

I kid, I kid. Mostly.

My DMs turn up the heat. We are way into combat. It’s usually hard fought victories. Not always but often. If combat is risky or I cannot just tell it will be easy, I think it’s more engaging.

For crying out loud—-how long are most people’s combats? Make them a reasonable length with some risk. Our sure too wins are typically pretty quick.

Saturday we played a string of combats—-there was time pressure in stopping a seal from being broken. We prevailed but the end monster could do almost 100 damage which would down/kill any of us. As such, I felt appropriately engaged.

Maybe with my low IQ I am easily amused. Or the pleasure is to play and some people are more into acting or other aspects that -D&D does not codify or do exceptionally well.

**edited for spelling

 

[aco175]

I'll admit that sometimes I like to keep the fight going one more round so the monster can do something cool or deal some damage. I had a giant that was dead before it had a turn, so I gave it some more HP for one action. Another time the BBEG used his cool power on round 1 and was going to die on round 2, so same thing so it could hit a PC and deal damage . Maybe part of this is to make the PCs use some resources and maybe some to satisfy my encounter design not being totally nerfed.