Large, aggressive animals in real life are very scary.
Imagine encountering an enraged bear or pack of wolves while hiking in the woods.
Monkeys like baboons and macacques can move very fast, have strong muscles and fangs. Chimpanzees have been known to rip people's arms out of their sockets and people's faces off. Gorillas can kill an unarmed human at will, and presumably even if you were armed with hand-to-hand weapons, you had better get the first blow in. Something with that strength and agility would be curiously squashing your skull before it noticed that you had slashed it with with your sword.
Yet in an RPG these are the most mundane, boring encounters.
Then 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.
I think the key factor that is different in real life and RPG combat is the speed and strength of creatures. Fighting with brute animals is very swift and wounds are egregious.
Do 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?
My 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.
And no, I'm not just, or even primarily talking about D&D.
Quote from: The_Shadow;805966Do any RPGs reflect these realities?
I think RPGs, in general, are poor at reflecting any reality. I just don't go in with that expectation, you know?
I think from the character's point-of-view you are right. In myth and lore, there was little differentiation between a "monster" and a "beast". Many creatures we think of as monsters were just beasts (albeit large, scary ones to the ancients and medievals) and creatures we think of as beasts were monstrous and scary (wolves, wild boar, tigers). The monster/beast distinction arises for us because we KNOW that griffins are mythic while elephants are real, whereas to an English peasant both are wondrous.
Mechanically speaking, some games do a good job of making animals quite scary. A grizzly bear or lion is actually a fairly terrifying monster in BX or ACKS. In ACKS, an Ogre is AC 4, HD 4+1, with 1 attack dealing ~ 6 damage, while a Panther is AC 5, HD 4, with 3 attacks dealing ~ 3, 3, and 5 damage. In other words, a Panther is harder to hit and hits twice as hard.
Conversely, I think the reason scary animals aren't scary in many fantasy games is that even scary monsters aren't scary in those fantasy games.
Quote from: The_Shadow;805966Large, aggressive animals in real life are very scary.
Imagine encountering an enraged bear or pack of wolves while hiking in the woods.
Monkeys like baboons and macacques can move very fast, have strong muscles and fangs. Chimpanzees have been known to rip people's arms out of their sockets and people's faces off. Gorillas can kill an unarmed human at will, and presumably even if you were armed with hand-to-hand weapons, you had better get the first blow in. Something with that strength and agility would be curiously squashing your skull before it noticed that you had slashed it with with your sword.
[ .. ]
And no, I'm not just, or even primarily talking about D&D.
And yet, OD&D did have one idea that would help. Beasts and monsters can attack a number of normal (1 hit die) humans equal to their hit dice. Instead of rolling multiple attacks, you could just roll for the number of ordinary folk that get offed every round.
Which points to a problem with your assumption, though: we real-life people are afraid of beasts because we're ordinary people. Something huge would be snapping 10 to 12 of us internet nerds in half every 30 seconds. Fantasy heroes would be another matter.
My games are less fantastical than most from what I glean by reading about other games on here, and I can tell you my players would not be happy to meet a grizzly bear or a wolf pack. in fact, they sought shelter/hideout just due to hearing howling wolves in the near distance on a fog-shrouded morning. But my games don't feature scads of demihumans and D&D monsters. most of their foes are their fellow men.
Take a look at Atlantis: The Second Age, a fight with a lion is brutal.
While general animals are scary and dangerous, a lot of that has to do with "Who" the animal finds itself up against. Dogs and and wolves terrify some people, and can be very dangerous, but there are plenty of adult humans who've no trouble stopping one or two of them, if sufficiently focused on doing that. (This is not to say they escape unscathed!)
The big problem is many people panic when confronted with a powerful animal. A few don't, and those that don't panic are generally what some people are interested in playing--heroes who can focus and fight back with no problem. (Partly because lacking better abilities to immerse themselves, they've never seen just how terribly dangerous an animal can be, and can't imagine it being tough.)
I've used encounters in more than a few games that challenged players ordinary animals, but a lot of how effective that is depends on a) Using the animals natural tactics. b) Using a rule set that doesn't make them entirely underpowered.
RuneQuest 6 animals can be very tough. If you encounter an angry Grizzly Bear, you'd better have a spear or something to try and keep it off you through distance or impaling it, otherwise you're probably gonna get one-shotted if you're not wearing any armor. A pack of wolves surrounding you, tripping you and going for the legs, then once you're down going for the throat, you're pretty fucked if they outnumber you.
Quote from: Matt;805978My games are less fantastical than most from what I glean by reading about other games on here, and I can tell you my players would not be happy to meet a grizzly bear or a wolf pack. in fact, they sought shelter/hideout just due to hearing howling wolves in the near distance on a fog-shrouded morning. But my games don't feature scads of demihumans and D&D monsters. most of their foes are their fellow men.
Mine too. In our current game an encounter with a single viper was enough to put the scout off scotting 500m ahead for 3 levels.....
Most of the time things aren't scary because gms are lazy bastards.
GM - up ahead is a black bear
Player - hmm okay what's it doing
Gm - you know bear stuff nussling round for berries or something
Player - okay I will shoot it with my bow
Etc
As opposed to
GM - as you move down the path you hear a massive roaring to your left
. A massive black shape barrels out of the woods .... roll surprise
Playern- what is it?
Gm- roll surprise and we'll see if you have enough time to recognise it
Push for real time action and response don't let the players think or plan tactics whilst in combat. Describe the effects of the bears actions, ripping out trees, etc but keep its description of itself brief and sketchy.... trust me it will scare the crap out of them
Maybe for an unarmed, unarmored person. But I don't think they are too much trouble for someone with a decent weapon (and/or armor).
I don't think humans get nearly enough credit for our strength and agility. People have been known to kill bears bare-handed (https://www.google.com/search?q=Man+kills+bear+bare+handed). Add weapons, and there's a reason we are the top of the food chain.
Rolemaster. 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.
Quote from: saskganesh;805988If you are outnumbered by animals it can get very bad. Your parries are limited and they'll get flank and rear attacks as well.
This should be the case but from what I gather it seems there are many GMs who don't have the PCs' foes use their brains and/or instincts and such. I have played many games where a large number of enemies don't take advantage of their numbers or use any intelligent tactics and then, even when getting the stuffing knocked out of them as a result, don't flee or surrender. My players recently got the drop on some bandits in a monastery and I'll be damned if the bandits weren't making morale checks once their leader and badass was down. PCs then captured the one that couldn't escape. And animals should use their abilities to the utmost unless their is some explanation as to why not. But personally games where the PCs are super heroes able to laugh off any threat have never appealed to me and fortunately my players seem to dig it as well, even if it means they die as a result of poor judgment or a few lousy rolls inthe dice and rolling up new characters.
A lot depends on how they're played.
Our Pathfinder GM is a hunter and wilderness nut so wild animals in his games have never been pushovers.
We had an entire session devoted to hunting one big grizzly bear... and it was nearly a TPK (partly because we got stuck in our own trap).
Last session my sorcerer PC was zeroed out by a desert cat before a few good blows sent it running.
Meanwhile I'm noticing that in our online 5e games all the monsters are feeling alike... there's no difference in how they behave in combat, it's just a matter of whittling them down before they whittle us down. Dark Mantles might as well be skeletons or mimics because the GM plays them all the same way.
Quote from: JeremyR;805986Maybe for an unarmed, unarmored person. But I don't think they are too much trouble for someone with a decent weapon (and/or armor).
I don't think humans get nearly enough credit for our strength and agility. People have been known to kill bears bare-handed (https://www.google.com/search?q=Man+kills+bear+bare+handed). Add weapons, and there's a reason we are the top of the food chain.
Humans also try to give themselves more survival credit than they usually have. Bears have been known to survive multiple gunshot wounds from revolvers and still wipe out half an exploration group. Rare, but it happened.
If you know what you are doing though, or just get lucky, you can hold your own against a large beast. But its no guarantee. And some predators will wait till you are sleeping.
D&D and most other RPGs though are pitting more seasoned adventurers against these things. But. At least to the AD&D era animals were a viable threat to low level characters. Especially the magic user. Just a glance through the start of the AD&D MM and we have the Ape(gorilla) doing 1-3/1-3/1-6, the Bear(brown) doing 1-6/1-6/1-8, Boar(Wild) 3-12, and the Lion 1-4/1-4/1-10.
I tended to use them as viable threats up to about level 4, sometimes 5 if the PCs were particularly rolling poor on HP. aheh...
Not so sure in 5e where the viable cut off point is though. The PCs have more HP and do more damage now whereas most of the animals might survive one or two hits. But are likely going down in a round or two.
Something to look at more later. Its just not a factor that has come up in the current 5e campaign.
Sure, 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.
Quote from: Critias;806005making it fun and exciting instead of terrifying and dangerous.
I think terrifying and dangerous can be fun and exciting. In fact, it's more fun and exciting when you win because it was terrifying and dangerous.
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.
I'm curious how 5e's bounded etc will play into this... from what folks have been saying, a pack of wolves seems like it should be a credible threat for a long time.
Quote from: talysman;806057And 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.
This is a good post. I think it is realistic that even large predatory animals should feel like exciting but only semi-dangerous foes to a group of confident, armed humans. I wouldn't be afraid of a pack of big dogs or wolves if I had a half dozen mates who liked to fight and had stout branches and rocks in their hands. No wild animal would really attack a group like that. Maybe a bear would, though I doubt that too. A much more plausible scenario is the lone character faced with a group or single large beast. That would likely be a tough fight in most game systems unless the character has excellent equipment, magical powers or is powerful
Quote from: Will;806111I'm curious how 5e's bounded etc will play into this... from what folks have been saying, a pack of wolves seems like it should be a credible threat for a long time.
Havent had a chance to test it out yet. It is on the to-do list.
A mage with shaped fireball? Not a chance for the wolves. Otherwise?
At a glance. Not sure. Low HP for the wolf is the main factor. But in numbers they all get advantage and assuming they number more than the adventurers can kill in a single round, its likely some are going to connect with a chance of knocking prone someone in the process. If a few can drag down a character then that could be some serious trouble.
Just a guess though.
I've had a few GM's who made wild animals a credible threat to low level characters. And I just finished a Pathfinder campaign in which insect swarms were our group's worst nightmare. I'm not sure if those fall under the category of "beasts" but I used to consider them a mundane threat, and I now have a whole new respect for them.
Quote from: Xavier Onassiss;806374I've had a few GM's who made wild animals a credible threat to low level characters. And I just finished a Pathfinder campaign in which insect swarms were our group's worst nightmare. I'm not sure if those fall under the category of "beasts" but I used to consider them a mundane threat, and I now have a whole new respect for them.
Indeed, insects and the like should be more frightening than higher animals. I mentioned above that animmals tend to avoid humans unless they greatly outnumber them or there is a greater threat than personal safety. But swarms of insects know no fear or reason. They won't necessarily hunt you, but they act much more on an almost automatic level, heading towards food when that is their need. Bees and the like fight to the death to defend the collective.
Quote from: CRKrueger;805981RuneQuest 6 animals can be very tough. If you encounter an angry Grizzly Bear, you'd better have a spear or something to try and keep it off you through distance or impaling it, otherwise you're probably gonna get one-shotted if you're not wearing any armor. A pack of wolves surrounding you, tripping you and going for the legs, then once you're down going for the throat, you're pretty fucked if they outnumber you.
As CRKruger pointed out, RuneQuest 6 is specifically designed to make common beasts very scary indeed. I've never been a fan of making something like a lion 'dangerous' by just inflating its HPs and attack %. That's boring, doesn't scale and to be blunt is pretty unimaginative. Lions are scary because they hunt in a pack, use ambushes and drag you down with a maintained bite - rendering the bitten limb useless if its not your throat they are crushing to asphyxiate you!
For RQ6 we incorporated several pages dedicated purely to how creatures fight, their behaviour and how to maximise their threat. Almost every creature in the book has specific tactics and associated abilities which mimic how they act in real life.
None of my beasts just stands there and exchanges blows. They charge, trample and depart; or grab and pull victims underwater to drown; or enter close combat/grappling range so the PC cannot use their beloved sword; mob with superior numbers to swamp defences; snatch a single victim and carry them off before others can come to their aid; use trips or leaping to force PC's prone; ambush to inflict a maiming wound then flee, and so on.
A bear or lion might seem more intimidating on paper, but my players more rightly fear large herbivores, crocodiles and insect swarms over all else. After all, there are more ways to terrify characters than just incrementally reducing their HP's to zero... ;)
Yep, the "swarms" in 5e can deal out alot of hurt if you run into more than one.
In Arrows of Indra, wild animals can be a very credible threat for quite a while of low-level play.
Well finally did that run through with the 5e wolves.
It took 8 Wolves 5 rounds to kill my level 7 Warlock.
A: I way overestimated Armor of Agathys.
B: I underestimated that pack bonus.
C: I totally did not expect to be so thoroughly screwed when they dragged me down.
Wolves started at 120ft when spotted. I cast Armor of Agathys first.
Next round dropped Hunger of Hadar and caught four of them in the zone. Getting out of the zone two would fail their saves and not be seen again.
Third round saw four of them getting initiative and were all over me. First one hit and I failed the knockdown save. Blasted the two that hadnt moved yet with Eldrich Blast and only hit one who did not go down. Armor of Agathys killed three that chewed on me.
But that left three and on the next round all three got initiative. But I survive and take out one more with Eldrich Blast.
Two left on round 5. I am down to 2 HP. One gets initiative, hits and thats the end of me as he gets max damage. Damn overkill wolf!
To be fair though that was a tough encounter and wolves get some notable advantages if things go their way. And would have been more so had they gotten closer before being noticed. I'd have used Arms of Hadar instead I think. Not sure if it would have helped. Maybee two castings could have dropped all eight.
All three of us against say 16 or 24 wolves? Probably would have gone more in our favour. Though not so sure on 24!
So seems to me that yes, at least in 5e some animals can be a viable threat even so far in under the right circumstances. YMMV of course. But I personally am glad to see this.
One of the scariest creatures in Hackmaster is something called a Dog. I'm not sure what that is ;), but there is a dog pack mauling mechanic that makes a group of them brutal. They WILL pull you to the ground and then you WILL be chewed to bits.
Quote from: Pete Nash;806411A bear or lion might seem more intimidating on paper, but my players more rightly fear large herbivores, crocodiles and insect swarms over all else. After all, there are more ways to terrify characters than just incrementally reducing their HP's to zero... ;)
I picture Pete Nash's players gingerly creeping through a jungle on crooked limbs, twisted muscles covered in old claw marks and scars, at the ready, clutching their pouches full of Khitai black lotus blossom powder.
I think it is handled just fine. Play a party of normal men, even men-at-arms and those large beasts will be truly terrifying.
Once you add in class levels any expectation of simulation/reality in comparison with actual human beings goes bye bye. The whole point of gaining levels and power is being able to handle fighting things that make ordinary men shit their pants as a normal part of adventuring.
If you enjoy games in which the characters never become larger than life and ordinary beasts stay scary then just play ordinary men in whatever system you are running.