Quick Balance Question for a pseudo-homebrew

[SpikeFightwicky]

I have a race I'm thinking of creating, that's basically just a pallet swap of goblins (same base stats and abilities, just different look, philosophy, etc...). That brings us to my question, as I want to fiddle with their racial ability:

My race relies on numbers in combat, individually being weaker, selfish and easy to frighten. Would it be balanced to give them the kobold "Pack Tactics" ability when they outnumber their enemies and when they become outnumbered they lose "Pack Tactics" and gain the "Nimble Escape" ability (as per goblins)? If their numbers
My instinct is that it doesn't affect them too much since it's either or, never both active at once. However, it also means that they'll have the best of both worlds, naturally being more inclined to easily escape when HP is low. It doesn't feel broken to me, but I mainly DM. As a player, would a creature that went from vicious dog pilers to easily withdrawing once their numbers dropped seem unfair or annoying?

[Man_Over_Game]

I have a race I'm thinking of creating, that's basically just a pallet swap of goblins (same base stats and abilities, just different look, philosophy, etc...). That brings us to my question, as I want to fiddle with their racial ability:

My race relies on numbers in combat, individually being weaker, selfish and easy to frighten. Would it be balanced to give them the kobold "Pack Tactics" ability when they outnumber their enemies and when they become outnumbered they lose "Pack Tactics" and gain the "Nimble Escape" ability (as per goblins)? If their numbers
My instinct is that it doesn't affect them too much since it's either or, never both active at once. However, it also means that they'll have the best of both worlds, naturally being more inclined to easily escape when HP is low. It doesn't feel broken to me, but I mainly DM. As a player, would a creature that went from vicious dog pilers to easily withdrawing once their numbers dropped seem unfair or annoying?

I would feel it'd be very annoying, as there's not a lot you can do to interact with the Disengage action, especially if it's passive.

How I'd do it is grant them a feature called Coward's Courage:

"When initiative is rolled, you gain Temporary Hitpoints equal to the number of allies in combat with this feature. While you have these temporary hitpoints, you also have the Pack Tactics feature. For each ally you lose vision of, or you see die or flee, reduce these temporary hitpoints by 2."

Similar concept, but easier to chase down, and a bit tankier. The extra durability means they're also able to regroup and plan another skirmish, with refreshed THP, creating an enemy that's consistent and worth giving chase for, but without something as frustrating as Disengagement.

Disengage should generally be viewed as an offensive maneuver for enemies, so that enemies have to dive heavily into combat in order to best utilize it (forcing allies to strategize around the enemy mobility). Players have Disengage as a defensive ability (like with Rogues) to ensure they stay alive, but monsters staying alive without having much counterplay could make for a frustrating scenario.

[SpikeFightwicky]

I would feel it'd be very annoying, as there's not a lot you can do to interact with the Disengage action, especially if it's passive.

How I'd do it is grant them a feature called Coward's Courage:

"When initiative is rolled, you gain Temporary Hitpoints equal to the number of allies in combat with this feature. While you have these temporary hitpoints, you also have the Pack Tactics feature. For each ally you lose vision of, or you see die or flee, reduce these temporary hitpoints by 2."

Similar concept, but easier to chase down, and a bit tankier. The extra durability means they're also able to regroup and plan another skirmish, with refreshed THP, creating an enemy that's consistent and worth giving chase for, but without something as frustrating as Disengagement.

Disengage should generally be viewed as an offensive maneuver for enemies, so that enemies have to dive heavily into combat in order to best utilize it (forcing allies to strategize around the enemy mobility). Players have Disengage as a defensive ability (like with Rogues) to ensure they stay alive, but monsters staying alive without having much counterplay could make for a frustrating scenario.

Thanks for the information! I did one campaign as a Player, but the enemies weren't very tactical (most fighting to the death regardless). I took over the campaign and of course, the first thing I want to do is home brew some stuff. I appreciate the player perspective insight!

Also, your idea is spot on. It encapsulates a "strength in numbers" feel without just being pallet swapped. It also gets interesting when they accompany some stronger enemies, as the PCs will have to figure out whether to whittle down the smaller threats or shrug them off and deal with the more immediate ones.