So, I'm sure I'm not the only one who has Players that get too damn-the-torpedoes determined to end up "getting" the bad guy, that they are quite willing to charge in to their nearly-certain deaths to fight the bad guy, or that will not accept giving up at chasing the bad guy at every fucking turn?

This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but at some point it has its limits; in particular, it has its limit where the player isn't seriously considering that the possibility of failure or death should even exist for their character, contrary to all evidence in front of them.
I mean, there's no reason that the players shouldn't try to kill the uber-boss or try desperately to catch the fleeing villain so that he doesn't strike again; and I'd be a poor GM if I just rigged a way to make this impossible for them once I had put it on the table.
But on the other hand, they're stupid players if they think that I'm somehow obliged to make the opponent defeatable or the villain catchable; something that I think a lot of players believe must be true.

Personally I blame D&D.

No, you didn't hear that wrong; this is something I place blame on D20 for.
.
.
.
.
I'll just let that sink in.

Ok, good? Let's continue:
For certain, before D&D 3.0 players still had a reckless level of risk-taking in fighting enemies, but usually if you put a group of low-level players against an obviously very powerful wizard, or against a dragon, or what have you; they would RUN like the wind, screaming like little girls.

But now, players have all been convinced, via the mentality of "challenge rating" and "balancing encounters", that I as a GM are somehow obliged to ONLY put them up against opponents that they actually stand a reasonable chance of somehow beating.
As such, running away just never comes up as a serious option for them anymore; and catching the bad guy becomes a full-blown requirement.
As a result, GMs are forced to either give the players what they want, fudge the combat, etc; or end up having either a very quickly dead party (in the first scenario of facing a vastly superior foe), or a very long unproductive last two hours of the session (as you patiently play through all the Player's efforts to catch the opponent and not let him get away, explaining to him time and time again that it would just not be possible to get him/find him).

This creates some serious hassles in high-risk campaigns, or if you're running games where, say, you want to have a recurring villain and a non-dead party.

But how the fuck to deal with these kinds of things without being all railroady?

RPGPundit

Well my starting point as far as the battle itself goes is that not every villain will kill off the party, maybe they'll just beat the crap out them, take their gear and sell them to slavers. Or maybe the bad guy will rip a page out of a Bond novel and set up a gruesome, over-elaborate, but avoidable trap to 'properly' kill the party, then leave for no good reason. Either way, I won't be afraid to impress upon the party that if they mess with the dire bull, they will get the horns.

Mechanically, I see CR as not only a means of balancing a fight, but as the mechanism for determining XP. Since my next D20 game will have PC leveling determined by me alone, they can't just assume that getting into a rediculously tough fight will net them any great benefit beyond a butt kicking.

Finally if they simply ignore every attempt I make to warn them of how outclassed they are, I might just have to kill a good deal of them. I don't really seek this option, but if I have to I will.

What's wrong with having a chat with your players, telling them that you don't stick slavishly to the CR mechanism? They should keep in mind, that for reasons of a realistic world or storytelling, there might be opponents that are beyond their way to manage. Especially with new players who come from another D20 DM who didn't do this, it might be neccesary. In the same conversation, I usually explain that I don't care too much about the standardized wealth distribution either. The PC's aren't _entitled_ to fair challenges and appropriate treasure.

It usually helps to introduce an encounter they can't solve by pure scream-and-charge tactics pretty early on. Then if the argument comes up, the player can remember that and be more careful.
"He can't be that difficult!"
"Remember the half-dragon half-celestial ogre mage Fighter/Mage in our first adventure?"

Interestingly, the first "adventure path" from WotC did something like this. In the second adventure ("Forge of Fury") there was a roper. WAY beyond the abilities of the party. From reviews and discussions, it seems that quite a lot of players actually tried to fight him. Some people (including the author) even suggested taking him out if the party is too enthusiastic (i.e. dumb).

Sometimes taking the Hackmaster view is appropriate: Kill them, the next characters will be better.

I once ran a AD&D 2E campaign. One of the most memorable fights was a battle between the 5th level characters and a 10th level necromancer, who had booby-trapped the upper floor of an inn (he'd seen them coming from a window, charging through a merc company.

The necromancer used the spare turns he had before they arrived to cast Web, Darkness and Summon some Shadows (ugly combo, I tell you), plus a Stoneskin on himself (2E Stoneskin is nuts, IMHO). The mage also used Vampric Touch and area damage spells during the fight, killing one character and critically injuring some of the others. In the end, the group forced him to teleport away (but with one important NPC as hostage, heh), but only because the cleric had managed to bribe the mercenaries' leader.

Cakewalks get boring pretty fast. Epic struggles with unexpected results are memorable.

My players often run at the first sign of danger. It's kind of funny, really, because I rarely kill pcs. I am however fairly notorius for taking all their stuff, or limb/eye/ear. I once had one the PCs chained to a chair in an arena full of lizardmen as one of the bad guys removed the pc's fingers one at a time- and ate them.

With my players it's kinda weird. They know I don't stick to CR so anything they meet might be horribly over or underpowered compared to them. Generally they tend to run when they should and fight when they should. But then, at some point, it always happens that they suddenly decide to not flee when they're geting beaten senseless. I don't know if it's because of a desire to go out in a blaze of glory, because they've gotten so familiar with their strengths they're overconfident, or what.

QuoteBut now, players have all been convinced, via the mentality of "challenge rating" and "balancing encounters", that I as a GM are somehow obliged to ONLY put them up against opponents that they actually stand a reasonable chance of somehow beating.

Total Bullshit, and misunderstanding the CR system.
 
But: Published 3.x Adventures, they surely cater and breed that line of thinking.

Don´t mix a measuring tool with it`s application. CR has been there, always. But current published adventure design is different, than in those "against the giants" days.
That´s the problem, not the CR system.

I wonder how much of the issue is in an encounter's set up.

One of the hard things about the fight that the PCs can't win is that when the players realize they can't win, it's too late for them to run. Or, they at least feel that way.

Take the roper encounter as an example. If the players come across a roper and a few of them beat its initiative, the party's fighters might charge forward to attack. Only after the roper attacks does the party see that they might not be able to win. At this point, the party still has a few members engaged. Does everyone just run and leave them to their fate? In this case, the players didn't know they were "supposed" to run until it was too late.

On top of this, the initiative system is pretty hard on groups that try to run away. Here's a classic situation:

PC or Monster -- Initiative
Rogue -- 17
Fighther -- 13
Troll -- 11
Sorcerer -- 9

Let's say the party decides to run away. If the rogue and fighter are between the troll and the sorcerer, what do they do? They can stand and fight for another round, or delay, but the troll might eat them. If they run, the troll goes next and attacks the sorcerer.

I think the CR system does contribute to situations where the party doesn't run, but I also think the system does things to make running away hard to do. On top of that, it falls to the DM to give the player enough information to make an informed decision before the party commits to the fight.

Dave Noonan had an interesting article about this on the WotC web site. I can't fight it right now, but it's there somewhere.

Quote from: SettembriniBut current published adventure design is different, than in those "against the giants" days.
That´s the problem, not the CR system.

Really think so? I'm not the most avid adventure buyer, but in the few I read, there was quite a wide range of challenge ratings. And considering that most recent adventures stress "dungeon ecology" a bit, you could easily inflate the CR heavily if the monsters from the neighboring room arrive.

Did the WotC adventures get worse and only deliver a +/-1 deviation from the expected group level?

QuoteDid the WotC adventures get worse and only deliver a +/-1 deviation from the expected group level?

I talking from first hand experience with paizo adventures, Age of Worms to be exact. We just hit 20th level, and never had to run. Every single encounter was beatable. Sure, there were som Group level+5 fights in them.
Still running was not even considered once.

OTOH, I GMed Against the Giants yesterday for a 3.5 group, and after they scouted the hill giants steading, they knew they had to deal with the situation smartly. They tried guerilla tactics (killing the chief, blaming it on the cloud giants, attacking lone giants etc.), until the hill giants set up a trap for them, and they fled to fight another day.

QuoteOn top of that, it falls to the DM to give the player enough information to make an informed decision before the party commits to the fight.

I really have the impression it´s all about how (dungeon magazine) adventures are written these days. They oftentimes don`t give you information and/or choice on the upcoming encounters. Flight and avoidance or guerilla tactics make only sense if you face a larger problem/challenge/conflict like in ATG.

As much as I'm ready to jump on the hat of d20 bandwagon, I don't think its entirely the fault of D&D or the CR system.  I've seen the same behaviour out of players who have never even touched it.  I think it's just a natural part of RPGs, though it is something you can deal with.  I don't think its a case of expecting the Big Bad to always be defeatable.  I think its more that most players would rather lose a character than let the bad guy get away.  Making the BBEG kill off characters isn't going to teach them anything.  They know damn well that their characters will likely die, and consider it worth the cost.

Metagame mechanics can help here - it gives the GM license to give them an escape route and pay off the PCs.  Another option is to make the BBEG secluded or hidden and the challenge of the campaign is to *find* him.  But unless you utilize cut scenes or something that doesn't make him much of a recurring villian.  Or you can have a reason for them not to kill him - perhaps he holds someone they care about hostage, or has some impenatrible defense.  Find the hostage or pierce the defenses, then go to town on him.

Quote from: JamesVWell my starting point as far as the battle itself goes is that not every villain will kill off the party, maybe they'll just beat the crap out them, take their gear and sell them to slavers. Or maybe the bad guy will rip a page out of a Bond novel and set up a gruesome, over-elaborate, but avoidable trap to 'properly' kill the party, then leave for no good reason. Either way, I won't be afraid to impress upon the party that if they mess with the dire bull, they will get the horns.

That's good in some instances, but not in others.

RPGPundit

Quote from: SosthenesWhat's wrong with having a chat with your players, telling them that you don't stick slavishly to the CR mechanism?

Nothing, except that many players won't really listen and will remain internally convinced that they MUST defeat the enemy before them right now, and not let accept cutting their losses and living to fight another day; or they will be convinced that there's no way a villain can or should escape their grasp.

RPGPundit

Then maybe, just maybe, that's the kind of game your players want to have: one where they have a shot at killing every enemy they run across.

There are worse fates than Monster of the Week; Ultraman does pretty well with it.

Quote from: RPGPunditNothing, except that many players won't really listen and will remain internally convinced that they MUST defeat the enemy before them right now, and not let accept cutting their losses and living to fight another day; or they will be convinced that there's no way a villain can or should escape their grasp.

Then that's a sign of a deeper problem. If the rules are the only thing that determines the gameplay, you'd have to adjust them for every different setting or even for every particular adventure style (e.g. horror). That's certainly possible, as the abundance of rule systems shows, but not really a practical solution, IMHO.

If the players are really that bound to a gaming system, some educational measures are needed. Exaggeration might be useful. Let them start in some kind of adventure where the enemy is so clearly beyond them that they'll notice. Something that's not subtle at all. A duo of pit fiends could be walking by. That's basically the definiton of high CR, so if they're level 2, they can't be that daft. If they are, let the pit fiend ride a wyrm red dragon...
If need be, killing the players might prove educational, lots of DMs tend to shy away from that. Or maybe you could have a high-level NPC with impressive abilities accompany them. Say, a wizard. Then a big monsters turns up -- a balor maybe? And this monster kills the NPC.

D&D has lots of "Oh shit!" monsters which are very useful in this respect. Beholders, mind flayers, dragons, tarrasques...