Spinning off a topic that came up in another thread, D&D lacks official rules for chases and pursuit, but I get the impression a lot of people homebrewing them in. Here's the system I'm currently using for my Dragon Warriors game (not D&D but similar in a lot of the fundamentals):

"Chase rules come into play when two (or more) parties with very similar movement rates are engaged in a pursuit. In such a case, each party has a "Chase Score", calculated as follows:

(Average of Strength and Reflexes, Rounded up) - Armor Factor (not counting any magic bonus to armor) + (1 for each meter of advantage in movement rate) + 2 if not carrying a shield or weapon larger than a shortsword

Chases are resolved in turns, which may be of any duration from one combat round to one hour, depending on circumstance. Each turn, the parties roll a D12 and add their Chase Score. If the pursuer rolls higher, they have gained on their target, if the pursued rolls higher, they have pulled away. Distance increments will vary by context."

For D&D I would convert that chase score system to [Str mod + Con mod + Dex mod - non-magical armor bonus + 1 for each 5ft of movement advantage + the same bonus for being lightly armed].

But that's just a system I worked up on the fly, because I needed some chase rules in a hurry. I'd be curious to see if anyone has a better system they're running.

I'd suggest adding a d10 to their Movement rate and rolling initiative each round.

I think the Chivalry and Sorcery third edtion is the most foot chase friendly rpg out of the box because you roll initiative each round and movement is per initiative point and actions cost initiative points.  There are also encumbrance modifiers to movement but that's pretty common in rpgs.

Trying to boil this down to raw attributes doesn't really mesh with the way I'd see a chase working. I'd try to KISS and make a simple RPS system where the pursuer chooses an action, and the pursued chooses an action, and we resolve it in one or two actions declared.

Pursued Actions:
* Outrun - Apply raw speed to get away
* Evade - Complex movements to throw off pursuit
* Obstruct - Create environmental obstacles to slow pursuers

Pursuer Actions:
* Overrun - Raw speed to run down quarry
* Track - Follow a pursuer at steady pace, careful not to get thrown off
* Outflank - Use knowledge of the environment to cut off the escape

I have a ruleset called "Hot Pursuit" made by Adamant Entertainment and published some years ago.  Won it for free on a contest at ENWorld.  It's 42 pages, made for general d20 rules under OGL, and quite good, I think.  It's a good resource for a d20 game, or a good starting place for example rules and guidance if you're working on your own system.

I deliberately designed my system to have overland movement rates not based on stats or tactical movement rates (which are modified by stats).  There's also a distinction between tactical and overland chase.

If you can get out of melee, then we drop the standard combat rules, and go to tactical chase. This is basically an Agility (stat) save group check for the party, but each player rolls once for all characters they control (i.e. one PC and possibly several henchmen), using the best roll out of the characters they control, typically.  Obviously, unconscious or otherwise incapacitated characters aren't rolling.  Disengaging a party is primarily about movement and experience, and saves get gradually easier in this system as the characters level.  Naturally, there are all kinds of bonuses or penalties adjudicated based on the situation, character actions, using terrain, etc.  Get a good enough plan and situation, we aren't even rolling--it works.

In chase pursuit, if you can get out of sight, out of range of the longest enemy attacks, block their pursuit temporarily, etc. you automatically go to the overland system.  Overland chase is primarily based on encumbrance.  Medium loads have no change, Heavy loads have a fairly severe penalty, and Light loads have a fairly hefty bonus.  There are, of course, plenty of opportunities to conceal tracks, change course, etc., which is only limited by the party's approach and abilities.  (Arguably, some characters should have a better/worse rates here, but the details wasn't worth it for me.  See Zelen's KISS remark.  I'm OK with dwarves making it on stamina and will, small characters trading a short stride for not carrying much weight, etc.  Mainly, though, I have complications elsewhere in overland movement that I want to keep, which means that I need the party to have a simple rate.)  As before, a good enough plan is an automatic win.

For me, chase is a parallel thing to searching a room.  Is it character skill or player skill?  I say usually some of both.  If you search the desk specifically looking for a hidden compartment you suspect is there, and it consist of one drawer being slightly shorter because of an extra back moved up a little--then you find it.  No roll needed.  I'm the same way on chase. 

I did build in some options to the magic system to frustrate and enable chase and escape.  For example, my version of the "hold portal" spell is more flexible, in that it can temporarily hold a door, but it can also make a pile of stuff into a magical blockade for a minute or so.  Toss some furniture in a corridor, make your own block.

Quote from: Zelen on October 31, 2022, 12:54:17 PM
Trying to boil this down to raw attributes doesn't really mesh with the way I'd see a chase working. I'd try to KISS and make a simple RPS system where the pursuer chooses an action, and the pursued chooses an action, and we resolve it in one or two actions declared.

Pursued Actions:
* Outrun - Apply raw speed to get away
* Evade - Complex movements to throw off pursuit
* Obstruct - Create environmental obstacles to slow pursuers

Pursuer Actions:
* Overrun - Raw speed to run down quarry
* Track - Follow a pursuer at steady pace, careful not to get thrown off
* Outflank - Use knowledge of the environment to cut off the escape

I mean, why shouldn't attributes matter?  I would think attributes (or a relevant skill if you have one in the game) would be much more relevant than idealized tactics.

Quote from: Venka on October 31, 2022, 03:33:16 PM

I mean, why shouldn't attributes matter?  I would think attributes (or a relevant skill if you have one in the game) would be much more relevant than idealized tactics.

Which attributes or which skills?  And what is the character doing in the game world that will invoke them? 

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 31, 2022, 03:56:20 PM

Quote from: Venka on October 31, 2022, 03:33:16 PM

I mean, why shouldn't attributes matter?  I would think attributes (or a relevant skill if you have one in the game) would be much more relevant than idealized tactics.

Which attributes or which skills?  And what is the character doing in the game world that will invoke them? 

In my current project the talent (attribute)  is always athletics and the skill depends on what you're doing:  running, swimming, climbing, sailing, etc.  Chase rules are used when someone's trying to move away, someone else is pursuing, and neither is doing anything that requires combat rules.  Seems simple enough.

Quote from: Venka on October 31, 2022, 03:33:16 PM

Quote from: Zelen on October 31, 2022, 12:54:17 PM
Trying to boil this down to raw attributes doesn't really mesh with the way I'd see a chase working. I'd try to KISS and make a simple RPS system where the pursuer chooses an action, and the pursued chooses an action, and we resolve it in one or two actions declared.

Pursued Actions:
* Outrun - Apply raw speed to get away
* Evade - Complex movements to throw off pursuit
* Obstruct - Create environmental obstacles to slow pursuers

Pursuer Actions:
* Overrun - Raw speed to run down quarry
* Track - Follow a pursuer at steady pace, careful not to get thrown off
* Outflank - Use knowledge of the environment to cut off the escape

I mean, why shouldn't attributes matter?  I would think attributes (or a relevant skill if you have one in the game) would be much more relevant than idealized tactics.

They can, but I don't see the point of having 75 pages of rules that no one is going to use to figure out if a goblin escapes or not. You can add more complexity if you need to, but I feel like once players get out of a combat they probably want things to quickly resolve and keep the game moving.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 31, 2022, 03:56:20 PM
Which attributes or which skills?  And what is the character doing in the game world that will invoke them?

Strength or Constitution should be your primary attributes here, as you seek to represent athleticism and over a long enough chase, stamina.  You could make case that Wisdom or Intelligence could help someone make a good choice when running or chasing, but you wouldn't want that to be a primary reliance, and most systems don't handle that idea very well (a guy with 10 Strength and 20 Intelligence should be easier to chase down than someone with 20 Strength and 10 Intelligence).

So in OSR, you might do a strength check and note the degree of success or failure.  In 5ed, you would use the Athleticism skill.  In 3.X, you could houserule something, but there's actually rules that call for a Dexterity check or a Constitution check depending ( https://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm ).

I prefer something less rigid than a pursuit minigame. A chase comes down to some number of legs, with the actions taken in each leg determining the relevant check. The chase ends when a sufficient gap is opened up, the gap is closed, or the course runs out. Stumble into an enemy patrol, opposed initiative to run before the other side reacts. Straight line sprint, strength. Weaving through obstacles, dexterity. Extended trek through challenging terrain constitution. Combine with taking a penalty to take secondary action, such as tipping a crate to create an obstacle, shutting the gate behind you, or panicking a crowd to prevent orderly pursuit. Success increases challenge for the presser, while the pursuer could try to take a shortcut or a path with better visibility. Hide and seek once line of site is broken is also a situational possibility.

Quote from: Venka on October 31, 2022, 05:40:36 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 31, 2022, 03:56:20 PM
Which attributes or which skills?  And what is the character doing in the game world that will invoke them?

Strength or Constitution should be your primary attributes here, as you seek to represent athleticism and over a long enough chase, stamina.  You could make case that Wisdom or Intelligence could help someone make a good choice when running or chasing, but you wouldn't want that to be a primary reliance, and most systems don't handle that idea very well (a guy with 10 Strength and 20 Intelligence should be easier to chase down than someone with 20 Strength and 10 Intelligence).

So in OSR, you might do a strength check and note the degree of success or failure.  In 5ed, you would use the Athleticism skill.  In 3.X, you could houserule something, but there's actually rules that call for a Dexterity check or a Constitution check depending ( https://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm ).

How about instead, if a player has a character do something where physical strength, endurance, etc. matter, then, and only then, will I invoke the attribute?  Because just flat out running isn't very interesting in pursuit. It doesn't map well to the fiction, and for that matter, it doesn't map that well to reality, either, beyond a few contrived cases that normally wouldn't apply to "adventurers".

This kind of thing is one of the biggest hidden drawbacks of having set rules for everything.  Sure, there's the obvious problem that you build up some complicated rules for some fairly niche issues, but beyond that the hidden drawback is worse.  It causes players to start ignoring the situation and the environment.  Worse, it can even get the GM to start ignoring those things. 

Finally, there's things like the vastly different speeds of different kinds of creatures, even mundane ones.  The party gets ambushed by worgs.  Outnumbered, they decide to try to get away.  Hmm, buffed adventurers running from fantastically hyped up, smarter, dedicated wolves?  The first question is how the setting wants to treat that, because I can easily make a case for the party is dog meat, no roll needed.  And if not, I'm pretty darn sure that strength and athletics aren't going to help with flat out running away.  Climbing a tree or a cliff, yeah.  But now we are back to environment and situation. 

Which sounds more exciting?  Party makes an abstract strength and/or athletics roll to get away?  Or with the worgs getting closer and closer, the party decides to scale the cliff face, using those same attributes, skills, and anything else they can bring to bear on the situation?  Which one is easier to adjudicate success and failure?  Which one is easier to adjudicate the relative situation after success, and what the complications might be?  Which one is likely to put the party in the position of making some tough decisions?

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 31, 2022, 09:38:09 PM

Quote from: Venka on October 31, 2022, 05:40:36 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 31, 2022, 03:56:20 PM
Which attributes or which skills?  And what is the character doing in the game world that will invoke them?

Strength or Constitution should be your primary attributes here, as you seek to represent athleticism and over a long enough chase, stamina.  You could make case that Wisdom or Intelligence could help someone make a good choice when running or chasing, but you wouldn't want that to be a primary reliance, and most systems don't handle that idea very well (a guy with 10 Strength and 20 Intelligence should be easier to chase down than someone with 20 Strength and 10 Intelligence).

So in OSR, you might do a strength check and note the degree of success or failure.  In 5ed, you would use the Athleticism skill.  In 3.X, you could houserule something, but there's actually rules that call for a Dexterity check or a Constitution check depending ( https://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm ).

How about instead, if a player has a character do something where physical strength, endurance, etc. matter, then, and only then, will I invoke the attribute?  Because just flat out running isn't very interesting in pursuit. It doesn't map well to the fiction, and for that matter, it doesn't map that well to reality, either, beyond a few contrived cases that normally wouldn't apply to "adventurers".

This kind of thing is one of the biggest hidden drawbacks of having set rules for everything.  Sure, there's the obvious problem that you build up some complicated rules for some fairly niche issues, but beyond that the hidden drawback is worse.  It causes players to start ignoring the situation and the environment.  Worse, it can even get the GM to start ignoring those things. 

Finally, there's things like the vastly different speeds of different kinds of creatures, even mundane ones.  The party gets ambushed by worgs.  Outnumbered, they decide to try to get away.  Hmm, buffed adventurers running from fantastically hyped up, smarter, dedicated wolves?  The first question is how the setting wants to treat that, because I can easily make a case for the party is dog meat, no roll needed.  And if not, I'm pretty darn sure that strength and athletics aren't going to help with flat out running away.  Climbing a tree or a cliff, yeah.  But now we are back to environment and situation. 

Which sounds more exciting?  Party makes an abstract strength and/or athletics roll to get away?  Or with the worgs getting closer and closer, the party decides to scale the cliff face, using those same attributes, skills, and anything else they can bring to bear on the situation?  Which one is easier to adjudicate success and failure?  Which one is easier to adjudicate the relative situation after success, and what the complications might be?  Which one is likely to put the party in the position of making some tough decisions?

Agreed that just making a series of checks is boring.  But tracking distance for a long time through a series of events can get pretty tedious.  I think the optimal solution is using a series of checks with events and decisions along the way that can affect the lead distance.  The events keep things interesting and so does abstracting away the tedious part.  That's what Hot Pursuit does and I thought that was a good model for my own approach.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 31, 2022, 09:38:09 PM
How about instead, if a player has a character do something where physical strength, endurance, etc. matter, then, and only then, will I invoke the attribute?  Because just flat out running isn't very interesting in pursuit. It doesn't map well to the fiction, and for that matter, it doesn't map that well to reality, either, beyond a few contrived cases that normally wouldn't apply to "adventurers".

I disagree, it's extremely common for simple running to determine the most common case for pursuit- some NPCs lose and run, and the PCs want to hunt them down for their last few coppers or to prevent them from describing them to their bandit boss, etc.  In these cases, the bad guys have broken rank and are running- either through a city, a forest, etc.  Running is the primary and most direct way to process this unless something interesting happens, and that's just not going to be all that common.

In any pursuit, there is the question of, 'can those fleeing either hide or take a path that is not obvious'.  This is a reasonable case if the two parties are far apart, but becomes less reasonable when they are close (even if round by round processing can make it look that way, especially with the run action in 3.X or the long rounds of older games).  Generally this isn't going to be how things are though, and such things should probably not be handled by the generic pursuit rules.

QuoteWhich sounds more exciting?  Party makes an abstract strength and/or athletics roll to get away?  Or with the worgs getting closer and closer, the party decides to scale the cliff face, using those same attributes, skills, and anything else they can bring to bear on the situation?

I'm more interested in which sounds more realistic.  If the PCs can escape with raw movement, then that's all I need to know.  If they cannot, then they will be interested in this kind of thing, and if it fails, we'd end up in round by round combat again, with the worgs starting not very far from melee.  But a bunch of checks is a perfectly fine way to handle an escape, even if it seems boring.