I had a party run and hide up a tree because of a raging female boar. One boar and its young. They were wise to get off the forest floor and up to a height. That was AD&D.

Quote from: Critias;806005, I think it's just that many RPGs actively encourage combat by making it fun and exciting instead of terrifying and dangerous, whether that be combat against a bear, an orc, or a bear with an orc on his back.

Agreed. The dirtier, nastier aspects of combat are largely downplayed in most rpgs to create a more cinematic feel.

I feel wild animals (wolves, lions, bears) are a credible threat in TSR/OSR D&D up to 5th or 6th level; WFRP 2e for a lightly-armored combatant of beginner or middling skill; and across board with Runequest 6e -- which are the fantasy RPGs I usually default to.

Quote from: Nexus;806018Agreed. The dirtier, nastier aspects of combat are largely downplayed in most rpgs to create a more cinematic feel.

Cinematic like Raging Bull? Cinematic doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.

The OP is right on; this is one of several common flaws to RPG combat. Another is that armor doesn't really work. There are a couple others one can easily think of. But the weakness of large creatures is near the top. Anyone who thinks they would have half a chance against a grizzly bear is high.  

There are a couple of games that actually do pretty well on this and most other issues of physical plausibility. GURPs is quite good. Runequest (at least the real version from the late 70's). The Fantasy Trip. In all of these games a lone human without magical aid and only melee weapons is in pretty big trouble.

D&D might do better than you think, IF you use all the rules at your disposal. I don't recall the grappling rules from 5E off hand, but perhaps they would give a bear or pack of wolves the appropriate edge in melee combat?

Quote from: The_Shadow;805966Yet in an RPG these are the most mundane, boring encounters.

It depends on the game - there are a lot of games where large beasts are incredibly dangerous.

Quote from: The_Shadow;805966Then you get monsters. Have you seen how real spiders move? One the size of a horse that could actually move at speed could basically kill anyone. They wouldn't circle around you and trade blows in multiple combat rounds. Strike, sever head or leg, game over.

Scaling creatures up doesn't mean they keep their relative speeds. A spider the size of a horse would probably not be able to move.

But, fast attacks can be modelled in different ways in different games.

Quote from: The_Shadow;805966Do any RPGs reflect these realities? Is it worthwhile tying to capture the actual feeling of tension and fear that you might get when walking through the forest and encounter a troop of gorillas or a lion? Or is it more fun just to escalate to wacky mythical creatures and leave animals to bestiary entries that are mostly ignored?

Games such as RuneQuest/Legend/BRP/OpenQuest handle this very well. Large creatures do more damage and sometimes have thicker skin/heavier armour. Some creatures have higher DEX, which means they can attack faster/more often. Some have multiple attacks. Put these together and you have a real problem.

The tension side depends on the encounter.

A lion charging an unarmed man would cause a lot of fear. However, a lion charging a big game hunter would be calmly dispatched.

Quote from: The_Shadow;805966My underlying feeling is that something is lost when players wade in to all sorts of creatures for the umpteenth time, without having a visceral feel for the realities of physical combat.

To a certain extent, a party of well-armed, well-armoured, skilled warriors would be able to take out a lion easier than a party of unarmed dancers.

Quote from: The_Shadow;805966And no, I'm not just, or even primarily talking about D&D.

Nor are we.

Quote from: saskganesh;805988Rolemaster. Beasts have high DB's, good armor types, often get first strike due to QU and most get multiple attacks, many of which have low crit thresholds.

Even the Tiny Animal Critical Chart is a dangerous thing.

If you are outnumbered by animals it can get very bad. Your parries are limited and they'll get flank and rear attacks as well.

The Tiny crit table is nasty.  It really has the sense of a small vicious thing tearing around your body and ripping you to shreds.  It's also the funnest crit table to read.

I keep glancing at this title and reading it as 'Breasts' and giggling like a ninny.


On topic... I agree.

One thing I liked about 3e is that it wasn't hard to make animals more important, add class levels, etc. (I like adding Barbarian levels to bears and similar)

Quote from: Matt;806026Cinematic like Raging Bull? Cinematic doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.

And I don't think you know what I mean. "Cinematic" is generally treated as the opposite of "realistic'. Details are downplayed or altered to create a more exciting or interesting story. Yes, even films like Raging Bull with brutal fights are still usually cinematic in some sense as they endeavor to be entertaining and exciting (and in some cases, believable) instead of strictly depicting or, in the case of games, modeling reality which can be dull, anticlimactic and even unbelievable.

Quote from: Will;806045I keep glancing at this title and reading it as 'Breasts' and giggling like a ninny.

If you're fighting them then I'm almost 100 percent certain you're doing something wrong.

But it should be a big deal.

And thanks, btw, now I all I can see in the thread title is "breasts".


On the topic, It really depends on the genre and setting for me. For instance, in Exalted, a bear is a walk through but in most AFMBE animals should be as big or more of a thread than the dead.

Quote from: Critias;806005Sure, in real life various apes/monkeys are crazy strong, boar hunting was dangerous, getting mauled by a bear is suck-tastic, and a lone hunter being circled by wolves should be really worried.  In real life, fighting a dude with a sword or an axe is pretty dangerous, too.  In real life, taking a broadhead or two isn't terribly pleasant, nor is it unlikely to barely slow you down in a fight.  In real life, getting hit with a ballista bolt is super lethal.  

In real life, lots of stuff really sucks to encounter, but in game we expect our characters to dive in willy-nilly and -- hopefully -- emerge victorious.

There are grittier, more lethal, games out there that ramp up difficulty and often actively discourage combat of any sort.  I don't think it's a problem that's unique to animal/monster fights, I think it's just that many RPGs actively encourage combat by making it fun and exciting instead of terrifying and dangerous, whether that be combat against a bear, an orc, or a bear with an orc on his back.

Thus the difference between D&D and Traveller combat. Also why those games appeal to different tastes of Players.

Quote from: soltakss;806039To a certain extent, a party of well-armed, well-armoured, skilled warriors would be able to take out a lion easier than a party of unarmed dancers.

And to a certain extent, neither would be able to, because if we're going to talk realistic beasts, we're overlooking something. Unless cornered or protecting young, animals don't typically attack groups of humans. Predators go for solitary targets, or try to isolate one target from a group. Herd animals generally avoid humans completely unless stampeding or otherwise in terror. Ape troups might attack multiple humans if they outnumber them by a good margin. A rogue beast might approach a larger group of humans, but they are scary precisely because they behave abnormally.

If you really want players to fear wild animals, focus on ambushes and picking off the party one by one.

Now I'm thinking of games like Macho Women with Guns...

Quote from: Will;806084Now I'm thinking of games like Macho Women with Guns...

The crow with a machinegun is tough. So is Bambo... never underestimate animals...

I used to work as a veterinary technician. Something as small and simple as a determined house cat can lay a serious hurting on a human being if it has a mind to... Not to mention the followup infection.

How big a deal fighting beasts is depends entirely on the GM and the game mechanics. Hunting and fighting beasts in King Arthur Pendragon puts characters at risk, so do large animals at low level in D&D. At high level in D&D it is more like Tarzan taking out a silverback gorilla with only a knife. The GM description can also make a big difference. Would you rather fight "an angry house cat" or "a snarling yowling ball of hissing spitting feline fury, eyes blazing with hellfire, ears laid back, claws digging deep as it lunges for your face"? Both are the same creature in the same encounter.