How frequently should monsters try to flee combat that goes poorly for them?

[tchntm43]

In some cases I feel like it fits the monster type. In the first two adventures, the party was at level 1 and fighting goblins and kobolds, both of which are known for being cowardly and running away if things go wrong. I've had a recurring NPC villain flee at the end of both battles the party fought with him. There was a green hag that turned invisible and fled when she realized her trap ended up trapping her worse than the party member she was trying to corner.

I remember in 2nd edition (the only other version I've played), there was a monster stat called Morale, and that could be used to determine if a monster fled when finding its confidence being tested. 5E has no such stat, and nothing that I can see to use to determine which monsters flee easily and which fight to the death.

[JackPhoenix]

About as frequently as it makes sense. Generally, monster's behavior is mentioned in its fluff. The variety of possible circumstances make some set morale mechanic pretty much impossible to do. Kobold ambushers realizing they bit more than they can chew with attacking the adventurers? Every reptile for himself, run! Kobolds defending their young in their lair? Victory or death!

Now, if only PCs learned from them....

[DMThac0]

Now, if only PCs learned from them....

Preach! Though I have to say I'm proud of my Saturday group, they've run from 2 fights now! Granted that's in 3 years of playing, but still..they ran rather than TPK.

--
to OP:

As JackPhoenix says: when it makes sense. I have my monsters run all the time, though not always to get out of combat. Sometimes they run to lure the players into traps, sometimes they run to gather reinforcements, sometimes they run to find a better spot to fight in. Whenever a combat starts it's important to ask yourself "Why are they fighting?" and from there you'll be able to figure out how they'd respond to heavy losses or morale crushing situations.

[Great Dragon]

@tchntm43:
For non-Humanoid monsters, check their Wis.
Sure, they might be dumb enough to jump into a no-win fight, but could realize they need to run fairly quickly.

I see a lot of the "Fight to the Death" mentality being applied to Orcs.

But, for me, it's Hobgoblins. Convincing these to quit when behind is difficult. Especially if there's another Hob nearby.

[Sigreid]

Beasts should run away as soon as they're really injured.

For intelligent opponents it depends on what they believe is on the line if they quit and how likely they think they are to get away.

[Chronos]

Yeah, it always comes down to "why are they fighting". If they're fighting for profit (say, brigands trying to rob a caravan), then they'll run as soon as fighting becomes unprofitable. If they're fighting because their commander ordered them to, then it depends on how loyal they are to their commander. If they're fighting to defend their home, then they might not even have any place they could run to.

[Keravath]

Honestly, I think that NPCs should run from fights far more often than actually happens. When a PC calls out offering them quarter they should also accept far more often than actually happens. At least with most of the DMs I have played with.

If you are fighting beasts or unintelligent creatures then they may fight until the death, particularly if they are prone to anger or are defending home or young. On the other hand, a lot of these creatures who get sufficiently hurt might well decide that fleeing makes far more sense.

A group of kobolds or goblins defending their home might well fight to the death. A group of bandits attacking some travelers and not doing well, far more likely to retreat or flee. As soon as it doesn't look good for the bandits which could be as soon as even one of their number drops, the rest might be thinking that there is too much risk here and it would be better to be somewhere else. Why would a bandit fight to the death if someone offers to take them prisoner? The possibility of escape has to be better than the certain death awaiting continued combat.

In my opinion, the DM needs to get into the head space of the creatures involved in the combat. Why are they there? How would they reasonably respond to how the combat is going and offers of clemency from the characters? This makes the fight feel far more realistic since the combatants then respond appropriately to how the battle goes. This can include the NPCs deciding to leave characters who drop so they can be a prisoner later if they happen to survive or, depending on motivation, having the NPC take the time to finish off a character so they can't get back up. (PCs hate this but for some NPCs it is a realistic course of action and the PCs should be aware of this risk).

[DragonMF]

I would say as much as it is natural and not to overdo it because it can frustrate the players if it happens all the time

[Wuzza]

When a PC calls out offering them quarter they should also accept far more often than actually happens.

Wow, your PC's actually try to let enemies live? :smallbiggrin:

[stoutstien]

I don't agree with him most of the time but I enjoy reading about trying to breath more depth into NPCs

http://themonstersknow.com

[Jamesps]

I assume that any creature that lives to adulthood understands that some circumstances require retreat. The dumb ones will simply wait too long before retreating.

[Laserlight]

Why would a bandit fight to the death if someone offers to take them prisoner? The possibility of escape has to be better than the certain death awaiting continued combat.

They might not hear or understand the offer. Helmets restrict sight and vision more than you might expect, adrenaline in combat will alter your perception in various ways (your cone of vision tends to narrow, you may not notice even loud noises and if you do, you might hear them as "noise" rather than "speech", I've been hit hard and not noticed it until later), and they may not speak Common or understand your accent.

Even if they do, there have been plenty of cultures which considered a relatively quick death in battle to be preferable to what they'd get if they were captured. "Save your last bullet for yourself" and so forth. So it depends on who's capturing them. The Knights of Easy Mercy, sure, surrender. A ragtag bunch of murderhobos who're likely to be forceful about asking questions about where your gold is hidden ? Well, run if you can, but if your back is to a wall, you might as well try to take one with you.

[Aprender]

I love the posts above and agree.

I would add that if your players' party of supposedly nice guys keep picking fights, slaughtering weaker opponents without mercy and chasing down every potential victim regardless of need, then I would encourage your NPC ambushers to run away into the waiting and loving arms of a much, much bigger threat.

It's one thing if a party has motivations that make killing appropriate, but if you have a party of chaotic stupid murder hobos, please feel free to encourage them to show some restraint through force.

[Sigreid]

I love the posts above and agree.

I would add that if your players' party of supposedly nice guys keep picking fights, slaughtering weaker opponents without mercy and chasing down every potential victim regardless of need, then I would encourage your NPC ambushers to run away into the waiting and loving arms of a much, much bigger threat.

It's one thing if a party has motivations that make killing appropriate, but if you have a party of chaotic stupid murder hobos, please feel free to encourage them to show some restraint through force.

I do not consider it chaotic stupid to not give people who attack you with deadly force another crack at it.

[Vogie]

At my table, I use a sort of combined Flanking/Facing stat, and make frequent use of the "bloodied" condition - that is, a change of mind or tactics when a creature reaches half hit points. So when I'm populating an encounter, I really only have to think about a certain number of motivations:

When in a Normal Encounter
When Bloodied
When "Out of Ammo" (usually for spellcasters or equivalent)
When Surprised

Creatures that have evasion features, like flight, teleportation and/or invisibility variants, will tend to save one option of that to escape. Something with an at-will or multiple instances of invisibility or Misty step would use it offensively at first, then later use it defensively.


I don't agree with him most of the time but I enjoy reading about trying to breath more depth into NPCs

http://themonstersknow.com

This is a great resource, especially if you are running a published campaign (or using an encounter table) and you wouldn't be sure precisely how some random thing you never heard of would react.

[OverLordOcelot]

One problem is that combat in 5e is very short and quick - a lot of times enemies will go from looking fine to mostly dead between round 2 and 3. Often by the time they realize the combat is going poorly, they're mostly dead and the party will have no problem mopping up the fleeing enemy. IMO this makes it hard to really have fleeing enemies, as there isn't really time for a fight to develop from good to bad before it's over. Also if you want the players to not try to cut down all of the fleeing enemies, you have to refrain from making it appear to be a bad decision. If there's one time where the PCs let the last few henchmen run off, and then their next fight has them added on, they're probably going to decide that they need to kill as many as possible from then on.

[Aprender]

I do not consider it chaotic stupid to not give people who attack you with deadly force another crack at it.

Agreed, but please read the preceding part where I mention picking fights, slaughtering the weak and disallowing any attempt to disengage regardless of need to do so. We've all had campaigns where the "biggest bad" was probably the PCs that routinely invaded enemy territory for conquest.

If your party is walking down the road from town to town and y'all are jumped, you do what you need to. Same if you're working to oppose that darn evil lich that wants all the souls for his phylactery. If your party goes into a quiet part of the underdark where sentient species look differently than you (but live otherwise peaceful lives) and you go on a murderous rampage, then you're the bad guy.

[Lunali]

If the enemies aren't so caught up in battle that they don't realize the situation, they should consider fleeing once they can tell that they aren't going to win. They should only actually flee if they feel they can actually get away. Given the weapon range available to adventurers, this usually means they should only flee if they think they can reach reinforcements or some form of obstacle that will help them escape.

Far more likely would be surrender, which is also a more interesting result than the usual outcome of battle.

[Laserlight]

If you want a lengthier discussion of factors in monster tactics, Non-Mechanical Difficulty Levels for Monstrous Threats (http://blog.trilemma.com/2014/10/non-mechanical-difficulty-levels-for.html) may be helpful.

I agree that 5e fights tend to go from "undecided" to "complete defeat" very quickly...but I've played out a number of historical battle games, and often they do tip over suddenly. If the scale is large--regiments, say--then the losers can often run away (well, the first ones to flee can get away), but in a small action, if you can't hide, you're probably dead.

[RedMage125]

When I run things, I go by a "when appropriate", as other have mentioned.

One thing that I think is very important in this discussion is that Hit Points are not necessarily "meat", and so are not necessarily an indication of physical injury (5e PHB says this is up to the DM). In my games, however, a critical hit is always a "meat strike", even if it's a non-lethal one. And when a creature is below half its max HP, it is "bloodied", which is, to say, somewhat injured. One thing I don't always mention but that factors in when I make my call of how beat up somethign is is that if it's current HP is less than the number of Hit Dice, it's taken some injuries and looks to be tired/worn/wounded. So, for narrative purposes, a level 12 Fighter with 8 HP left is battered, probably spitting blood, and otherwise looks messed up. A level 2 Fighter with 8 HP has probably only just been bloodied, and looks to be in better shape.

Beasts that are simply attacking for food will almost always flee when the cost becomes too high. Which means most apex predators will simply move on once they are hurt (sharks are especially prgamatic, you bloody a shark or get even one crit, it leaves), unless there's a story reason that the animal is desperate and starving. Parent animals protecting nests/young will fight to the death when it makes sense to do so. There are some beasts that will defend young to the death (I believe owlbears fall into this category), but most natural animals will not prioritize the lives of untested cubs over a successfully mated pair of adults. but even taht requires the animal to be fairly injrued (only a few HP left).

Goblins and Kobolds (save for those who are being commanded by someone or something MUCH scarier than the PCs) will flee when the fight is not going their way. Kobolds specifically may "flee" as the PCs advance, because their strategy often involves a "false retreat" to guide the PCs into more and more traps.

Hobgoblins are extremely well-disciplined soldiers, and will likely not flee or surrender unless ordered to. And will certainly never do so when their commander is alive. If their commander is killed, and they are certainly out-gunned, remaining hobgoblins may accept an offer of honorable surrender, especially if it is respectful of their bravery.

Orcs are almost certainly too stupid, savage, and wild to surrender. They're also extremely devout to their gods, and dying in combat to take down an enemy of Gruumsh is the best kind of death to them.

Drow will certainly flee once the threat of punishment for doing so no longer outweighs the prospect of death in combat (i.e. you kill all their priestesses and captains, and the fight is clearly going against them).

Humans get problematic, because they run the whole gamut. Bandit raiders and highwaymen will probably flee once the PCs outnumber them, and they're losing the fight. Professional soldiers/guards/mercenaries facing what they're used to (i.e. other people) usually will not flee. Town guards will probably flee a dragon, certainly. Those fighting for special conviction usually will not surrender or flee.

Undead almost never flee (Vampires and liches are exceptions, and even they usually only do so if their immortality is threatened). Constructs never do. Fiends usually won't either, if they do, it's probably a ruse.

[jjordan]

Lots of good responses. My response is: Yes, opponents should be trying to do something other than fight to the death.

Why are the enemies fighting? What are they trying to do?

When the creatures believe they can no longer accomplish the task they have set for themselves, then they should begin to think about ways to survive the combat rather than win it.

This can get fairly complex. Will the orc raiders retreat when it becomes clear they can't breach the walls of the village or will they seek a glorious death? And a lot of this is based on perception. The orcs might believe they can't breach the walls when, in fact, they already have and what they are seeing is a hasty illusion put up by the party to convince the orcs the wall is still intact. Are the orcs motivated by loot? Are they starving and need food? Are they cultists responding to a call from a cleric of Grumsh to prove the valor of the orcish race? Have they been hired to burn the town by a third party? Are they trying to rescue orc prisoners? Facing hated foes?

So it's difficult to quantify these things with any degree of specificity and the creature/opponent actions should be consistent with their motivation and circumstances.

[darknite]

It definitely happens, especially in routs. If the combat is a slow one but the outcome is known and the resources cost to the party is likely to be low, I'll wrap it up by having the opponents run.

[MoiMagnus]

The parameters to consider are:

1) Is there any remaining challenge? You probably have better things to do of your evening than rolling dices and making additions, so if there is no longer any choice and everyone is in "autopilot", you should probably stop the fight with a fleeing party, a surrender, or arbitrary decide the resolution of the fight.

2) Are the player having fun? I mean, some players do still have fun without any challenge against them, or find the remaining of the fight boring even if there is technically still some challenges to overcome. If your players no longer have fun, it probably means you should do something. Either put an end to the battle, or add a new element to it.

3) Does it make sense narratively speaking? Are the enemy couard? Do the enemy understand they have no chances to win?

4) Consistency. If the enemies started a fight they have absolutely no chance to win while having full knowledge of it, it probably means they don't care all that much about their life, and making them run for their life isn't consistent with them starting the fight in the first place.

[Pex]

Doesn't matter as long as the players aren't screwed over by it which is what concerns them the most.

The players earned the XP for defeating the monster. Make sure they get it, not old school no kill no XP.

Sometimes it does make sense for a monster that runs way to come back with reinforcements or otherwise make trouble for the PCs. This should be for blatant campaign plot reasons with the players having full realization it's not their fault the monster got away. Most times a monster that runs away is never heard from again.

As soon as a returning monster causes trouble because it's the players' fault for letting him get away, the players will not let a monster run away again. Same thing with letting a captured prisoner go after questioning. You might get away with this once, but definitely after the second time the PCs will never, ever let a monster they fight live.

Clarification: This is a commentary on PC behavior. It is of no relation to the quality of DMing.

[Demonslayer666]

I would say rarely, but it would depend on the creature and situation (if escape was possible).

I don't see having an enemy run as fun for the players. Even if it is realistic, I have certainly had my players complain about it. They want the encounter to come to a nice and tidy close so they don't feel robbed. I've tried hand-waving it and making it no big deal, but they don't like it. When it comes time for the remaining foes to run, I just have the combat end and say they were defeated.

A DM wanting the players to run seems counter intuitive. Running is a very poor tactical decision. The only time one would run is if there is little chance for victory - a very hard thing to judge in D&D. Even then, it's pretty heroic to go down fighting. If you are the last man standing and you can escape or face imminent death, then yes, running is a viable option. But it half the party is still up and fighting, why would you run? I wouldn't, and no one else in my party would either - except our rogue. She would ditch us in a heartbeat and quite possibly stab the cleric on her way out.

[OverLordOcelot]

The players earned the XP for defeating the monster. Make sure they get it, not old school no kill no XP.

Side note: In 1st edition (any maybe OD&D and BECMI), while it was true that players got XP only for monsters they killed and not ones they bypassed, XP from monsters was a minor part of total XP. You also got 1 XP per GP of valuable treasure looted and a certain amount per magic item, and this normally provided the majority of your XP. Because leveling was really done by getting treasure, losing the tiny XP for letting a monster get away wasn't a big deal, and often there was actually a strong incentive to bypass or scare off monsters rather than fight, since it meant less risk/resources. 2E changed to getting XP primarily from monsters with some optional rules, and 3e introduced 'overcoming challenges'.


As soon as a returning monster causes trouble because it's the players' fault for letting him get away, the players will not let a monster run away again. Same thing with letting a captured prisoner go after questioning. You might get away with this once, but definitely after the second time the PCs will never, ever let a monster they fight live.

Quoting it to make sure the OP doesn't miss it :)

[Amechra]

My rule of thumb? If there isn't some pressing reason for a losing group of enemies to stick around and get slaughtered (they've got reinforcements coming, or they're defending their homes/families/sworn lieges), they should at least try to run and/or surrender. Granted, you have to let the players know that this kind of thing will happen, otherwise they'll assume that they have to kill enemies they run into.

Oh, and I'd still give the players XP for beating the encounter. I think that goes without saying, but players might assume otherwise...

[False God]

Flip a coin. Every time it comes up tails, they flee.

Unless there is some strategy or tactics involved that would speak to it happening more or less often.

My rule of thumb is that it doesn't really matter because players tend to give chase and kill it anyway.