I ask this because, I find that a common encounter with a bandit who goal is to rob people usually ended up with a fight to the death, with bandit only fleeing once they're only one or two of them left, or other status are put upon them to make them flee. But I usually just have them snatch the coin sack of a character and then running away as fast as they can and leave out a few trap along the way to their escape.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That sounds like the difference between bandits/highwaymen and pickpockets/cutpurses. Completely different "business models". You can portray them how you want; I usually just don't include them because the party is usually obviously bad targets in either case. I don't like using cutpurses because it assumes how the character is keeping all their money, when in reality they'd probably have it split up or something, but if I do run one, I'd always make sure to actually make the rolls. "You catch someone trying to steal your coin purse" is an equally interesting encounter, after all, and it's more fair.
Do mugger fight to the death often?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regular muggers? No, I don't think so. Most people prefer to live, so if they're outmatched, they either surrender or flee. Only truly desperate people fight to the death.
The only exception I can think of are mobsters or other people who report to some higher authority, where failure isn't an option. They might rather want to die than to bring shame upon themselves.
Do most encounter with criminal in the same manner as theif and mugger end with them dead?
Do most encounter with criminal in the same manner as theif and mugger end with them dead?
In a TTRPG? Usually.
IRL? Generally not. People don't like to die. And that goes for bad guys and good guys both. People generally only resort to violence if they are certain of their superior combat ability and confident that they can win the battle without dying in the process. Or if they are desperate, answer to someone with power over them, or otherwise would suffer greatly for not engaging in violence - the risk of losing the combat has to be lower than the risk of not engaging in the combat.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do most encounter with criminal in the same manner as theif and mugger end with them dead?
I think it depends on what serves the story. If you're including this, why are your characters fighting thieves? Is it a simple random combat encounter? The introduction of a group the heroes will have to deal with? A chance to drop a heart-wrenching item in front of the players, like the classic 'one more mark and I'll be able to buy the medicine for my daughter' note?
Most muggers and robbers would far rather talk their way out of having to fight, unless they have the upper hand. You see this in animals as well...most predators either attack from ambush, prey on things that cannot fight back, use overwhelming numbers, or all of the above. So, how will the bandits manage this? Will one person stand in the road and demand money while the others wait in ambush? Will they try to sneak up when the characters are asleep on the road? Surround and fire down at the heroes from the rooftops? Are they skilled thieves? Mercenaries? Peasants that are desperate?
There are so many factors that might affect things, and if they choose to stay or not. Keep in mind too that combat is fast from the perspective of the characters, even if it takes a while for us to adjudicate it. Most of the combats I run are over in 3-5 rounds, or about 30 seconds. Do the bandits have time to look around and realize 'oh crap, all my buddies are dead?' before they take an arrow to the eye? Are they experienced enough to recognize a losing fight?
In short, there's no one right answer. Let the needs of the story decide if they run or not, and relevant factors around the specific scenario. I will say that I tend not to run suicidal bandits in my games, but they have certainly been surprised before.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The GM could re-enact the "That's not a knife" scene from Crocodile Dundee. As QuidEst pointed out, robbers would ordinarily avoid a party that is stronger than them, but maybe they misjudged the strength of the party until weapons were drawn. In the movie Dundee let the robbers run away, explaining that they're "Just kids having fun."
There is also the scene of Uncle Iroh being mugged in Avatar: the Last Airbender as another example of a robber attacking a stronger opponent who only seemed weak. These scenarios are best played for laughs, because playing them seriously seems unfair.
My wife once ran a short Dungeons & Dragons campaign during our weekly church gaming group. Thugs lured to party to an alley and attacked the party. They were quickly defeated. Then a human paladin in the party, played by a teenager used to other campaigns with other teenagers, said, "I cut their throats." The cleric of the god of thieves, played by my daughter younger than the teenager but with more RPG experience, jumped to stand over an unconscious thug with her weapon drawn, and declared, "No, you don't." My gnome paladin calmly explained to the human paladin, "Vigilante justice can be necessary out in the wilderness, but we are in town. Here we deliver criminals over to the authorities for a trial."
On the other hand, professional raiders who attack a caravan guarded by the party can be played seriously. The bandits knew that the caravan would have guards, and they gambled that they were stronger than the guards.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to create a bandit gang trying to kill the party, it can make sense: For them, it's kill or be killed. If they're defeated, even if the party spare the bandits and hand them over to the authorities for a trial, they'll almost certainly be hanged (assuming we're operating under a pre-modern justice system).
They could try to rob you and spare your life, but leaving living witnesses is asking for trouble. Most of the party's wealth will be hidden about their person in the form of potions, gems, masterwork daggers, or whatever; running away with a random bag of gold isn't anywhere near as profitable as taking everything.
The still leaves the issue that the bandits, if they're CR-appropriate, would probably realise pretty quickly that they were out of their league and run for it, but that's an issue with most enemies who aren't mindless undead or insanely loyal assassins.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought this thread was going to be about how to portray PCs as thieves, which I think is much more interesting to consider. The game has legacy baggage attached to the concept which doesn't mesh with the modern day adventure expectations.
I would expect most random humanoids looking for a quick buck to run once they hit half HP or became outnumbered by any means (including other members running).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought this thread was going to be about how to portray PCs as thieves, which I think is much more interesting to consider. The game has legacy baggage attached to the concept which doesn't mesh with the modern day adventure expectations.
I don't understand what you mean. Adventurers are already mostly vigilantes who kill, steal and pillage. It's fairly easy to adjust to a more Robin Hood, Oceans 11, Lupon 3rd or similar type theme.
Short answer: Invest in the Thievery skill, along with (depending on exactly which flavor of robber/thief to portray) Acrobatics (balancing, falls) , Athletics (climbing), Deception (disguises, scams/trickery), Intimidation ("Pay me, or else"), Society (criminal contacts), and/or Stealth (hide objects, sneak around).
Just about any class will do...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thief is the most powerful subclass on the one of the strongest and most iconic subclasses, but thievery beyond murder hoboing in a dungeon or wilderness is usually ill advised. The big problem isn't morality per se, although Paizo adventures certainly default to good hero boyz. The problem with thievery is treasure by level and linear adventures.
Most adventures start with a random NPC hiring you to a deal with a danger to their community. A multi-session adventure will probably have you return to that community more than once, either to follow up on investigation leads or simply rest for the night. If you get caught stealing in said community, you'd likely horribly derail the adventure, at least for your PC if not the whole party.
To further muddy the issue, anything worth stealing (as opposed to the pocket change crimes underworld lore might use to Earn Income) would skew the WBL and/or call for its own side quest session. Pathfinder doesn't focus on things like magical security measures at shops, though it gives some decent tools to make them. (Pick trap levels based on the level of the merchandise, for example.) But that's such a big ask and probably not what the average D&D player was hoping for when they try to pocket a ring of protection.
While this isn't directly thievery related, I've also found selfish rogue players won't necessarily be helpful in combat, choosing to spend rounds hiding in fear, or putting their fingers in the tavern til while the party fights off the bandits attacking. D&D 5e is forgiving enough to allow this, but the default PF2 encounter settings are not. When I run into players like this, I realize they aren't interested in being tactical and just bump them up a level... But it's still a pitfall to avoid.
I'd really like to try an urban true sandbox where there's no plot to derail if you get on the wrong side of the law, but published adventures don't support that and it is a struggle for many GMs as well.
|
Do most encounter with criminal in the same manner as theif and mugger end with them dead?
Depends on how well the PCs know the thief. If the thief is a disposable NPC then the PCs will likely dispose of them. If the PCs know the thief and their 8 children they are trying to feed, then the PCs might have a completely different reaction, maybe even help them out. If the thief physically attacks the PCs to steal from them then that changes things a lot.
I'd really like to try an urban true sandbox where there's no plot to derail if you get on the wrong side of the law, but published adventures don't support that and it is a struggle for many GMs as well.
That would be REALLY interesting. Since we’ve gotten rid of alignment, something like this could support a range of play styles. I’m thinking along the lines of the Kingmaker AP, but set in an urban environment. We’ve already got a massive setting support book in the form of LO: Absalom. With the new three book AP model, surely Paizo could come up with an urban-based sandbox campaign that allows players to be both the subjects of thievery/thuggery and also leaves the door open for more mercenary play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Adventures have a lot of "fight to death" because its kind of what people expect, but it doesn't have to be that way. Strength of Thousands for example puts a fair bit of effort into getting across that problems can often be solved without fighting, and when they do fight, killing everyone isn't required. Hell, a couple of weeks ago my players were scolded by a teacher for that exact thing.
In the case of bandits... I mean they're generally already outlaws and will kill to survive if they have to, but you can tone that down pretty easily. Authorities tend to take a dimmer view on roving murder gangs than they do on thieves, so bandits that rob but otherwise don't seriously injure people are just not as likely to draw overwhelming response the way bandits that kill everyone are. (Pickpocket/building robbery/con artist thieves even more so, as their methods tend to want to avoid physical confrontation entirely whenever possible.)
Likewise, while in a common campaign adventurers tend to solve a lot of problems with "hit it until it dies", you can set a tone as a GM where local authorities don't actually want packs of vigilantes wandering around doing that. One of the easiest ways is to have authorities post bounties for those bandits that say "Wanted Alive". Suddenly killing them is no longer in the players interest as it will cost them the bounty.
This is a mindset shift from some players, but they can do it. And hey, if you want to spice it up, maybe those bandits are only stealing from rich folks because they were outcast by the nobles due to learning of some plot going on in town and would be willing to work with the PCs if they want to dismantle that operation?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Adventures have "fight to the death" as a default option I find, because that's the easiest way of dealing with them, from an author's point of view. Especially named NPCs or people who know the BBEG's plot could throw a wrench in the plans if they were to survive and spill the beans.
Plus, imagine an adventure where the author keeps track of every NPC after that encounter. The further you are in the story, the more elaborate the web of possible interactions becomes. An author might throw in an "if X is alive at this point, you can replace one random mook with X," but authors have limited time and resources available to them. Much easier to pass that job on to the GM, even if that seems lazy. I'd rather build that web myself than be overloaded with information from the get-go with flowcharts of which NPCs might do what, most of which becomes irrelevant when NPCs die.
For example, imagine four random unrelated NPCs that could potentially interact with each other, and might want revenge on the players. An author has to account for whether that person is alive or dead, and if they're alive, if they're free to do whatever or are thrown in jail.
A is free.
B is in jail.
C is dead.
A has several options:
- Break out B.
- Potentially resurrect C and join up with them. Or if resurrecting isn't an option, join up with C's family members, friends, colleagues, and so on.
- Join up with B and C.
Similarly, B might do the same, but has to plan from jail. Which requires a separate text explaining how they accomplish that. And same goes for C (or C's friends/family/gang members, etc). This is only three NPCs. Imagine doing that for every single NPC you meet. The only reasonable solution is if there's the same explanation for all of them. Explain how they do it once, and let some higher power take care of the rest. For example, some corrupt politician bribes all the jailed NPCs out of jail and resurrects the dead ones. That's a whole lot of text only for random NPCs to interact in the future.
TL;DR: "Fight to the death"-tactics might seem lazy, but it's just an easy way to not deal with enemies in the future. Any exceptions can be written out, but the GM will have to do the work if their players are merciful, because the author just can't account for all the potential outcomes.
Adventures have "fight to the death" as a default option I find, because that's the easiest way of dealing with them, from an author's point of view. Especially named NPCs or people who know the BBEG's plot could throw a wrench in the plans if they were to survive and spill the beans.
Plus, imagine an adventure where the author keeps track of every NPC after that encounter. The further you are in the story, the more elaborate the web of possible interactions becomes. An author might throw in an "if X is alive at this point, you can replace one random mook with X," but authors have limited time and resources available to them. Much easier to pass that job on to the GM, even if that seems lazy. I'd rather build that web myself than be overloaded with information from the get-go with flowcharts of which NPCs might do what, most of which becomes irrelevant when NPCs die.
I have an example from my campaigns. Minor spoilers for Prisoners of the Blight follow.
Morale The mind-controlled hobgoblins fight to the death. If the PCs manage to remove the mindslaver molds controlling them, they instead immediately attempt to flee.
I rearranged the encounter so that the party met Afet alone, who had occasional resistance to the mind control and could explain the situation. They freed Afet from control, knocked the other commandos unconscious in the fight afterwards, but Taurgreth was so dangerous they had to kill him. After freeing the other commandos from mind control and healing them, they united forces against Queen Arlantia. The hobgoblins returned home afterwards with Taurgreth's body.
When my players seriously derailed the next module, Vault of the Onyx Citadel, and the Ironfang Legion tried to hunt them down in the vault, I put Hadar in the patrol sent after them. The legion did not fully trust Hadar after he had teamed up with their enemy, but he was too high-level for the Ironfang Legion to not put him to work. Hadar took control of the patrol after the party killed its commander and stopped the fight before more Ironfang soldiers died. Later in the Onyx Citadel itself, the party encountered Emnas in a training room. He took charge of the trainees so that they would not get killed either. Finally, they encountered Taurgreth, who had been resurrected and restored to spymaster duty (he had not teamed up with the PCs, due to death). Taurgreth prevented a fight in the operations room and passed useful information to the party that increased the chance of a peaceful resolution.
I asked my wife about these new encounters. She remembered them. She said that since the party's goal was to change the attitude of the Ironfang Legion to end the war, the encounters with their now-peaceful rescued enemies were wonderful.
Returning to the original topic of bandits and pickpockets, some of those criminals could end up working with the PCs if the GM gives them realistic attitudes. If bandits who escaped the party by hiding in a cave discover a disgusting evil cult based in the cave, then they might pass word to the party. The local thieves' guild formed by the pickpockets might ally with the party in defense against a mutual extremely evil enemy.
Spoiler:
The first thing you do in OoA is rob a bank.
So making that sort of thing the focus of your campaign is fully a thing you can do.
As a GM you just have to balance income from jobs with expected income by level. Maybe put a lot of hoops in that are money sinks to the players, paying off local law enforcers and buying info on jobs, losing value from fencing things, etc.
You could run a Leverage type group, that show has tons of great ideas for adventures.
It might not be as straight forward as other campaigns but I think that would be part of the appeal.
|
Contributor
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... I wrote Heidmarch Heist, an adventure where the PCs have to solve a robbery and arson attempt on Heidmarch Manor grounds. I'll put my comments on this under a spoiler for those who have not played the adventure yet.
I had thieves who were down on their luck, and who could totally be convinced to surrender and just wanted another chance in life. There was even a surrender mechanic the PCs could use to get them to surrender and lay down their arms once they had fought a while.
And then I had the more hardened criminals, many of whom only fought to the death until their boss, who had a deep grudge against the PCs, went down.
This is one 4-hour adventure, portraying the thieves in various different ways, with different reactions to being tracked down and found. Embrace diversity.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd really like to try an urban true sandbox where there's no plot to derail if you get on the wrong side of the law, but published adventures don't support that and it is a struggle for many GMs as well.
I'm running an AP (Legendary Planet) which has extensive Urban Downtime between books where characters have done a bit of that. IMO, the biggest issue is that the players are rarely all on the same page as far as what they want to accomplish.
Book 2 starts with you infiltrating an organized crime org, and Book 3 starts with an epic heist, so it *is* a good choice for that kind of game. We're playing PF1, but there is also a PF2 version. (And a Starfinder version. And a 5e version. Legendary Planet for *everyone*.)
|
Normally when dealing with encounters where the enemy is someone who isn't willing to die for what they're doing, I use HP as a "This is when they start running" threshold, as opposed to them just straight up dying. If they take any damage whilst running, they die, and if they take a certain amount of damage over "0HP" they die on the spot too.
Can't speak for how you're "supposed" to do it, but this works well for me.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... I wrote Heidmarch Heist, an adventure where the PCs have to solve a robbery and arson attempt on Heidmarch Manor grounds. I'll put my comments on this under a spoiler for those who have not played the adventure yet.
** spoiler omitted **
This is one 4-hour adventure, portraying the thieves in various different ways, with different reactions to being tracked down and found. Embrace diversity.
My detective rogue loved that scenario. I never attacked once during that scenario and just spent my actions either urging people to surrender or off in some location I shouldn't have been while others fought. We constantly split the party, it was amazing.
Whether enemies fight to the death is entirely up to GM, and whether enemies get a chance to surrender is up to the players. The way I run muggers, they generally fight for about two rounds and then make decisions from there (if they make it that many rounds), but it's all up to you and your players.