The Secret to "Balanced" Combat Encounters in D&D 5e
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 06. 2024
- "Balanced" D&D combat has different meanings depending on our own preferences and themes of gameplay, but there's one approach that I think everyone can benefit from trying! ▶️ More below! ⏬
💥 The Secret Art of Game Mastery: www.kickstarter.com/projects/...
Best ways to support
✅ LIKE & SHARE: / bobworldbuilder
✅ PATREON: / bobworldbuilder
RPG resources (affiliate links)
🎲 DICE*: www.onlycrits.com/bobworldbui...
🛒 BOOKS: www.amazon.com/shop/bobworldb...
🧙 MY BOOKS: www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.p...
📚 BOXED TEXT*: dscryb.com/bob
*use discount code "BOB" !
Thank you for all your support, and keep building :D
00:00 they solved dnd "balance" 50 years ago
01:26 EVERY secret to game mastery! (sponsored)
02:02 old school dnd encounters are built different
03:57 how dice and players shift balance
06:11 players only ever have 3 options...
07:07 pros and cons of superheroic balance
08:50 simplifying balance for ANY style
#dnd #dungeonsanddragons #dndtips - Hry
💥 The Secret Art of Game Mastery: www.kickstarter.com/projects/thedmlair/the-secret-art-of-game-mastery?ref=41lqa8
✅ LIKE & SHARE: czcams.com/users/BobWorldBuildervideos
✅ PATREON: www.patreon.com/bobworldbuilder
I've always felt that "RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY!" is a fine battle tactic.
A man of good taste, I see
It "wins" every time. :D
Technically, it's also cinematic. :)
I usually encourage my players to yell something mean when fleeing. Like, "We shall meet again!!! Actually, not if I can help it! Later, evil jerkwad!"
I can’t recall, in 4 yrs of play (over 300 sessions), an encounter where the party ran away
I'd point to the Balrog encounter in the Lord of the Rings books and films by Jackson if someone says "you can't have super heroic fantasy where you run away from a fight "
Haha perfect example!
*_Fly, you fools!_*
@@pauligrossinoz and that's is still ,imo the prefect way to "exit " the dm pc when you feel the players got a handle on it , have them do something heroic that takes them off the board while narratively fitting the tension
Some of my best games were based on that scene.
The players go too far and discover an enclave of orcs who's leader is a balrog and then the fun begins as they make their getaway. It feels very epic.
honestly a whole bunch of scenes from both the lotr books and the movies are great examples of creative encounters.... the goblin cave empire-thing in the hobbit, shelob's lair, the treant enocunter, the scene running from the nazgul, the encounter with bilbo and gollum....
Regarding not keeping track of hit points, I've used it, but see it more like a game of chess. Once the party has manvuveared a strategy the has shifted the fight to overwhelmingly in their favor I let the scene play out dramatically. Like if the have managed to sneak the barbarian past the evil necromancer and now has him pinned to the ground without his spell components. Instead of rolling the dice to see how many rounds of kicking him in the shins it takes to kill him, we end the battle cinematically. The bad guy is in checkmate. The exiciting part of the battle is running the startegy to get him there. Not rolling the dice for the same thing each round to whittle down the last few hp.
That's a much better way to describe it!!
Nice!
I've never faced a problem with balance on the games I GM because I use a simple trick: "telegraph" the power of the monster the the players. Like a game desing approach, I set the expectations of the monster before any players chooses to face it. This way, the thrid option mentioned in the video (on 6:46) is more defined the players.
First encounter with a new (and soon to be recorrent) monster have to be an easy one. If it is a new, powerful and single monster, I use NPC describing its power (in a misterious way), use de scenario (markings of previous encounter), books and notes, allow PC to make skill checks. I also hint the monster power in the description. The player chooses how to approch the encounter.
I use it both ways too. I can create a mood of desperation in the player's heart, of their iminiant doom, but the monster is a fair fight. I have countless examples of they running away or developing plans too much elaborated for the fight ahead.
Nice! Signaling danger is critical
I think the more important aspect of balance is that between individual players, no one wants to just passively sit there while the others solve the problem
True, but that's character balance, not encounter balance. The nice thing is that what Bob's saying about encounter balance applies to character balance just as well. A DM balances encounters by giving the party enough information and options to be able to come up with a solution. A DM balances characters within the party by creating adventures that challenge multiple kinds of skills, abilities, and problem-solving approaches. It's the reason 5th Edition makes a big deal out of the Three Pillars (Combat, Exploration, Social) all being necessary for D&D. "A good DM uses every part of the character sheet." Put it this way: if you have a druid in the party and Druidic never plays a part in solving a puzzle or communicating with NPCs during the whole campaign, then the DM is throwing away good material.
That is a much different issue. Which also needs to be dealt with for sure.
@@SingularityOrbit It is _also_ something that the whole group, not just the DM, should handle. If you want to break _any_ of the prepublished modules, in just about any game system, get your players to sit down and work out synergies that open doors. Because prepublished modules try to be balanced for the _average_ group, they are designed for 4-5 characters that are soloists to be able to win. Come in with a crack _team_ and the "balance" falls apart quite quickly.
@@yellingintothewind Sorry, I'm not following your meaning. Are you talking about organizing so that everyone has a role, which is good? The later part about adventure balance is exactly what a DM is for: to make changes in accordance with what the players do (and what they can do with their skill sets) so the game doesn't break by becoming too easy or impossible.
@@SingularityOrbit "I think the more important aspect of balance is that between individual players". This is not the responsibility of the GM unless you have a very new group. _All_ the players should be trying to make characters tha _actually work together_ and fit well. This means _not_ having one character far more or far less "optimized" than the rest.
The GM does have _some_ role, in that they should highlight the indirect contributions of support characters, especially if no one else does. When the cleric casts magic weapon, letting the fighter actually hit, or do more damage, or bypass resistances, the GM should point out _why_ the fighter is so successful. But this is not on the GM alone.
“Combat Resolution: Conquer, Withdraw, Surrender, or Die” is a section in Holmes Basic or AD&D (I can’t remember). The choices are clear, but Withdraw is a choice some players forget. I think the linear nature of a lot of video games conditions us to an ever-onward style of play.
It's basically because most modern adventures are story driven as opposed to an open sandbox where you're supposed to gather treasure. If your only objective is to get easy money, there may be easier money in the next room. But if your goal is to rescue the princess, there's only one room with the princess in it, and you can't rescue her without conquering that room.
@@taragnor Well kind of. If you need to rescue the princess that can mean getting her and getting away. Killing everything in the room doesn't have to be the only option.
Yeah I think the 5e mindset is more like:
80% Conquer
15% Die
5% Withdraw/Surrender if we literally have no choice
The only consideration I give to combat balance is "it's only deadly if they stay to fight it out". I never kill characters out of nowhere. It has to be due to their own machinations.
That's a good policy!
So true and this is such an important concept. Ideally you want outcomes to add to the adventure, tension and fun. So a player rolling badly and dying from poison is kind of annoying and boring. But if a character rolls badly and now they have till the end of the session to find the antidote or die...that's adding to the adventure.
If the party stumbles into the lair of a monster that could kill a character with a single attack and it chops the head off one of the player characters before they even know it's there...that's not really fun. But if the monster attacks one of the players before they know it's there and knocks the magic sword they need to achieve a quest out of the character's hand and flings it into a pit underneath the monster...now they have to work out how to get the sword back without fighting the monster. And if the pit has molten lava that shoots into the air every minute or two...that's adding to the adventure.
You want to put obstacles in the way of your players and give them a chance to use their creativity to overcome them.
I try to use a two strikes rule. One dumb decision or one really bad roll shouldn’t kill a PC.
If you do something really dumb, though, you’re relying on the dice to save you. Similarly, after some really bad luck, I want a player to have the opportunity to act before they go down.
Hero points and similar metacurrency systems are my favorite for this, because it makes the “plot armor” PCs have explicit.
This gets to the heart of what I think is a fairly common issue: parallel play. When each player is playing their character independently, just waiting for their next turn.
In a game where most players build their characters in a vacuum, and often don’t even communicate what abilities/spells they have at their disposal, there also tends to be very little chance that they strategize about whether to run or not.
I always make it clear from the start that my players will likely end up in fights they cant win as they are, and that retreat is a voable option, ive even rewarded players with inspiration for realizing they cant win and running
Excellent!
You speak of the old ways!
Your idea at the beginning is great! My players and I always forget that you can avoid or retreat from a fight.
Thanks! Yeah I think it's way more common to fight to 0 HP than to have enemies or the party surrender/retreat
The easiest way my DM tells our party that "this fight will be hella hard" is to use monsters with class levels. It's hard to guess how difficult an Aboleth is, but as soon as you're fighting a squad of oathbreaker paladins dealing 1d8 extra damage to each attack and resist physical weapon damage while marching around with a small army of undead, that's a good sign to run.
Unfortunately most rules systems do not emphasizes alternate ways of resolving encounters in their mechanics. Everything seems to be about combat stats and deleting hitpoints. There needs to be explicit rules for retreat/chase mechanics (where everyone having exactly 30' movement is quite uninteresting, or if a monster has higher movement, fleeing is basically impossible). Stealth also needs to be better fleshed out, rather than just "fail stealth, so combat ensues...".
All of the above can be handled on the fly by a good GM without explicit rules... but the rules do nothing to guide new GMs to understand how to do these things. Indeed, I'd say 5e rules actively discourage both GM & player from thinking outside the box of combat.
@@birubu A lot of GMs feel like they have to hide monster stats, and let players sort of figure out how tough things are organically. But in most situations a person can tell whether they are outclassed or close to evenly matched. Give the players clues about how much danger they are getting into, but if their _characters_ should understand while the players aren't reading your signals, just tell them.
We talk about player agency a lot in our book, The Lost Dungeons of Tonisborg. Old D&D is a very cautious game because it is so deadly and no one is on a quest to get their PC killed.
The old rules for NPC reactions and Monster Morale are the flip side of the old school style of balance. Most sentient being don't fight to the death unless cornered.
Yup. The old rules have a lot of mechanisms for mitigating PC slaughters. Using reactions and morale really adds a lot. The deadly in older rules made players be really careful and afraid of combats.
Man, I can't believe I didn't mention that! xD Thank you!
I’m sure they had better rules for it in the old days but 97/100 times monsters cannot flee from the party. If they have a special movement option (swim, burrow, teleport) they might get away, flying or spider climbing could work too if they are fast enough to get 200 ft away (wizard spells are best at 120 ft but go up to 150 and 180). However most parties have someone based on mobility or just with really good range (or a fly speed, it’s tough to outrun an Aaracocra). In general a monster does more by staying and trying to down a pc then running. The exception is if they are well placed in a dungeon and can out run the monk/rogue they could get away but if they ambush the party’s on the road good night. It’s funny to think speed is a power crept stat but you need to pump speed for a monster to let it run away, or give it planeshift, that’s a guaranteed combo breaker as long as there’s no counter spell.
I've been in plenty of encounters that were "too hard" so the party ended up fleeing. Never take a fight you can't win, and the tables I'm at generally have an understanding of when a fight is getting out of hand and we should be coming up with an escape plan.
That's good to hear! Sounds like your group understands this method of balance
I'm curious, how do you decide when a fight is going to likely be lost?
@@sleepinggiant4062 Depending on how many players you have, if one or more PCs go down. I had a time where, in a group of three, our healer went down without us doing a ton of damage and severely outnumbered. We tried to run away, though a second player went down and only by lucky rolls was I able to get a win, because we knew there was no way to kill all the enemies and win.
Also, if everyone is low on health and the enemy hasn't taken hits, or just everyone's rolling extremely poorly, that's probably when as well
Yup, when you see players taking option #3 it is usually fairly experienced players. Sounds like your group has been playing for some time.
Very true. It takes a level of experience to get a handle on when you’re outmatched. But there are some good indicators - are you outnumbered, are you missing on high attack rolls, is it resisting most of your spells?
I understand the reasoning behind this statement, I really do, hell, on paper I even agree with it. But people often forget how hard it is to actually run away in D&D 5e (I have no clue if this applies to other editions as well.) 5e monsters tend to have the exact same, if not greater movement speed than most of the player races and therefore PCs. Opportunity attacks already restrict movement because disengaging is an action, making sprinting away impossible unless you're a rogue, but if you're one or two unlucky blows away from being downed, trying to run away might be more hazardous to your health than standing and fighting. Running in the middle of battle RAW, tends to be suicide anyway. Which is what leads to these, "*sigh* fine, might as well go down fighting *shrug*" moments.
If we stick to this line of reasoning and deduce that running away is not truly an option, it becomes more about picking your fights and where possible, stacking the deck and metaphorically weighing the dice. And even that can be ruined by the dice falling where they may.
Sure or the party could just be like "ok we flee" and you transition out of combat rules into chase rules.
@@ernestschmidt8761 There are no official chase rules, beyond "use your movement to get away" which runs into the problem I already mentioned.
Homebrewing something for a chase is all well and good, I recommend people homebrew as much as they want and is fun for all involved. But that doesn't really fix the fact that at a design level. As the book was written, there is no good way to get away, beyond DM fiat.
Expeditious retreat, Darkness, Web, Ball Bearings, Wall Spells or hell even Illusion Spells can help you get away...
Yeah, RAW escape can be tricky, but then it's also a matter of "does this dragon want to TPK the party or just eat one or two of them?" There are extremely few scenarios where the entire group of PCs or the entire group of enemies should all be reduced to 0 HP.
In reverse, if the orcs want to flee, fireball 120 ft, monk/rogue double dash, teleportation, and the fighter just running behind them and opportunity attacking will keep up. And PCs can switch weapons on a dime, pulling out a long bow or heavy crossbow to snipe fleeing enemies. Couple that with monster speed generally only being a slight bit faster then the normal PCs speed and it’s no good for them to run either. And we aren’t even talking about grapples, webs, difficult terrain, forced movement, control spells, and anything that makes a wall, which PCs have ready access to
Retreat and flight are perfectly legitimate options even when your DM hates you for it.
I once had a few new players. They took D&D as a classic PC RPG. When they got noticed by the goblin camp, they retreated to "restart". When they returned to the goblin camp a few minutes later, it was all alerted. And they were spotted again.
So it doesn't always work =)
This is the opposite for my players 😅 it's like, running is an option, whether you stick around to die or not lol
I wish my players considered those options...
I like impossible monsters that serve more as an obstacle or puzzle than a combat. They figure it out but unless they have a fear effect they usually want to take a hit first... But that hit could usually kill them.
I mean I WANT my players to win so retreating and coming back to fight another day is totally an option in my games
Hee Hee Hee "We choose option #3" is always a good way to scout the situation out first and then come back later when you are prepared to handle it. DM's sometimes need to lighten up. :D
For me its all about the story. An encounter is only there because it makes narrative sense. So the party will wipe the floor with some enemies and they'll begin to flee when the tide turns (or before if word of the party has spread).
Encounters are specifically that, not fights unless the players decided that its one. Saying that, everything the party can stumble into is ballpark beatable still, no one hit TPKs.
Sounds like you have a good handle on balancing your game!
I ran a session of "5e" for some folks who had never rolled a polyhedral before over the weekend and I didn't even attempt to balance the encounters. I was totally reliant on my knowledge of the system and comfort in winging it to see me through. I didn't track monster hit points, I instead made sure each of the PCs got a chance to shine and use some of the their cool abilities at least once, and I kept the boss alive long enough to hit a few PCs hard enough to make them sweat and feel the stakes of an epic boss battle and make their victory feel hard won.
Everyone had a blast rolling dice and fighting monsters, and they all want to play again, which was my only goal!
On the flipside, in my weekly PF2 game with my longterm group, I always start from a place of mechanical balance and adjust on the fly because they are much more experienced players playing a more long term game and I don't want to accidentally kill them by throwing a monster that's too tough at them because I didn't realise it.
Your approach is valid but more or less the exact opposite of what I know from old school gameplay. They want an immersive world and the GMs have a very hands-off approach, which is premediated on the idea that there's no requirement for the players to win or use all their cool abilities for the encounter to be fun. Sometimes players fumble the bag, sometimes they're a well-oiled machine, sometimes the infamous boss goes down like a chump, sometimes the renowned hero gets humbled.
@@fadeleaf845 Oh for sure, but I was specifically running a game for brand new players, never played any TTRPG before, players. My goal was to hook them and give them a fun session, and using all your abilities and doing cool stuff is fun. Getting humbled or the big boss going down like a chump is not in line with the expectation that this group had, or the experience I wanted to give to them.
I wanted to give them the taste that makes them eager to come back for more 🤣
Yeah! Different approaches for different situations
Honestly this is something I've been trying to teach players. The current play space has taught folks that no matter what they encounter it is suitable for their level and they can win. And while I don't think you should have every combat be impossible, having some things be clearly above their ability so they learn when it's a good idea to flee makes for a more interesting and living world.
Well said!
For this very purpose, I stated my campaign with a homebrew "retreat reaction"
The only homebrew in the game
D&D tends to kill those who don't retreat together
So the reaction lets you move your speed to when an ally ends their turn farther from all enemies than they started
The movement must also end farther from all enemies
The movement still provokes opportunity attacks
Of course as a reaction, it's max once per round
A year in, its saved them a number of times, maintained tension and hasn't been abused for other purposes
That's actually pretty good. 5th Edition doesn't handle retreat well. Basic D&D had a rule for escaping a combat which could be summed up as 1. Handle any attacks against the front rank of PCs as they turn their back and run. 2. The mapper puts the party map down and stops mapping. 3. The DM runs the party through their 3x speed running movement entirely verbally, describing the turns of the dungeon or the terrain of the outdoors as they encounter it. 4. The DM determines in secret if the enemy pursues. 5. If pursuing, then whenever the pursuer loses sight of the party then they'll stop the pursuit (it's not stated, but the obvious reason is because an unseen party could have rejoined allies or set a trap, so the dungeon-dwelling monsters' instincts warn them off). 5. The party may drop treasure or a day's ration of food as they escape. Intelligent monsters will stop to collect free treasure 50% of the time, and unintelligent monsters will stop for the free food 50% of the time. There was also a rule about a running party getting tired and being at a penalty to fight until they've rested.
History lesson aside, 5th Edition not having a good method for parties to run and survive is a big misstep. By the official movement rules it's likely that only barbarians, monks, and rogues have a real chance of pulling off a running escape -- and if that character is a halfling or gnome then even the barbarian might not make it. And all that's against humanoid enemies with a 30' Speed, not other beasts -- a few bad rolls against a small pack of normal wolves could trap a low-level party in a no-win scenario.
This is perhaps the best home brew to add in. It makes encounters more varied.
I think there's a lot of video gamey ideas of what balance looks like at the table; I put a death knight on the table for a group of players, and when it fireballed them and took no damage on a 19, I'll never forget one of my most tenured players saying "why would you put it on the table if we can't kill it." It later turned into one of the best RP sessions we ever had, but my player I think voiced the thoughts of a lot of players.
I think playing different versions of DND and using different systems has kind of shaken up expectations with my players; not to dog on 5e, but it feels like it tends towards being kind towards the players and not killing them. Contrast this with B/X style games where one good hit from a monster will just kill you. I would suggest that playing different TTRPGs can help broaden not just the DMs appreciation for balance, but also the players.
Wow if that's a sincere quote from the player, they definitely had the video game mind set! It's good to try to catch that sort of thing in a session zero.
@@BobWorldBuilder the other players reminded him that it's meta gaming to think that way, but it definitely betrayed his thoughts on the encounter. His character had a big old hammer, and I think every enemy I presented looked like a nail to the player. The session was definitely good to address that assumption, as several players were making death saving throws.
Suffice it to say, having a more brutal play style from time to time is good for everyone lol
I started with 2e in 1995 and I always tried to balance my encounters! Everyone still had fun, but it was just a little predictable. Only after playing for maybe 8 years did we accidentally have a fight that was too hard. When the players went back super prepared to take out that same enemy they felt like Gods!
I've only started "unbalancing" my encounters because of advice I found in the OSR community. It has made my games so much better. Thanks for sharing the good news, Bob!
Agreed!
Old school Mapping and Recon makes the game even more fun.
A trick I like to pull for some boss battles is starting them like three rooms before. 1. 2gnolls shot and retreat through corridos just long enough yo force melee players to dash or atack. 2. Once the gnolls aré pusehd back to the entrance of the temple their reinforcements aré waiting at the door to abush the players. 3. Once the players aré about halfway through the ambush at the door, the draw the atención of the head cultist an a dark cleric. 4. Once the Minions are dead a Balruga Is summoned.
That's a cool approach!
@@BobWorldBuilder it allows the DM to slowlly increase the pressure by opening the monster valve. I find it makes the battle feel massive but in reality is a bunch of small battles that whould be a piece of cake on their own. I've run this encounter for parties level 5 and 6.
Love it! So much tension and you're giving characters multiple chances to reassess if things aren't going well.
I watched Jacob dming "Icewind Dale" one time get his entire party of players in trouble. At a certain point I saw him "pull in the horns" of his bad guy, but it was not really that subtle. I mean, his party didn't figure it out, and his bad guy had run out of misty steps, which was one of the main things that was chewing up his party, so it was totally within reason for the bad guy to start to loose ground. And, like I said, his players didn't seem to notice. I guess I take that back, he was subtle. He seems to be a very good dm. Good video thanks.
It can be very hard to notice things if you're in the middle of combat and you're losing. It's not quite like watching Let's Players of various games miss "obvious" stuff, but whenever you observe a situation from afar, you've got a _much_ better chance of noticing things.
When it comes to solutions of puzzles and encounters, it's also easy to just not think of something, even if it seems obvious to the one who created it, or to anyone watching who just happened to have the same idea.
So I'm hearing I'm not an evil DM because I put 3 abishai before a 1st-level party. I agree! On a serious note, I always remind my players that running and talking (or parlaying, if you prefer) are fully viable options to fighting, and just like fighting, they aren't guaranteed to work. Finding out is the fun part.
Great video! I just started DMing DCC for my 5e group and I can see they are not really used to running away from fights and are having fun with this thrill of actually risking their PC's lives with every fight! I will definitely use some of those tips for my next sessions, thanks a lot.
Awesome! :)
Some of the best adventures I have ever run are when the players open a door and it's a gagillion orcs. The retreating battle as the orcs chase the players out of the dungeon ends up being truly epic. I actually talk about player tactics for players a lot in our Tonisborg book.
Love what you said about teaching your players that retreat is a valid option by having your intelligent monsters retreat when they start losing. Brilliant way to demonstrate behavior.
My personal solution is to balance the encounters that I direct the group toward through story hooks because otherwise I feel that’s a violation of promise and payoff. However, random encounters in the wild or places they delve into without story goals will have vastly unbalanced encounters that may require them to flee. This makes the world feel alive and dangerous, but doesn’t make progress through the story impossible.
Retreat is a very old mechanic dating back to wargames in the form of morale rolls. It has been in D&D since the beginning, perhaps not in later editions. It also applies to henchmen who are part of the party. It really adds another level to the adventure for sure.
Perfect video! This has been my biggest challenge is getting the psychology of the players understand the control they have
It helps if you teach your players to be more like a secret commando raid. They move cautiously and send the thief ahead to spy things out and listen at doors.Maybe have a player walking ahead with a rope tied around their waste to trigger any trap doors and keep them from falling all the way down the pit.
This way, instead of just running away, they are doing reconnaissance and they are choosing to not deal with the really big monster right now.
It adds a whole new layer to how the game is played when the players fear some of the monsters. IMHO.
Yet, it is up to you as DM to train them to this. Maybe even announce, we're gonna play a little rougher and you can try these things I am decribing to keep from getting thrashed.
This style of play is what is outlined in our book, The Lost Dungeons of Tonisborg. There is even a 5e adaptation of the dungeon as a PDF.
I've found that the most fun and balanced way to run combat is using many small encounters. Each battle is shorter, so it doesn't get boring. Initiative becomes more important. Hit dice are used and can run out.
Players lose resources slower and more consistantly, so they can more accurately gauge whether it is worth it to press on or turn back. In the event that they don't turn back and someone dies, they can clearly see how their choices led up to this point.
Great point!
I remember an old movie that had James Caan and Louis Gossett Jr. in it as old special forces team members.
In one scene this kid is trying to inspire the old team by saying that this team has never ran from a fight.
Louis Gossett Jr.'s response was "What?! Kid we ran from a lot of fights. That's why we are still alive."
There were two fights we abandoned. One against a green dragon, we had a plan. The fighter was kidnapped and we went to safe her. The warlock was invisibly scouting out the lair and wanted to come back to get me after checking the state of things.
Then the warlock decided "since I am already here, I could untie the fighter" shit went down and I wasn't there to help because my character was waiting outside, not too close so that the dragon won't notice me. After a few rounds I was finally able to justify having heard that the plan went down the drain and joined in to help, but it was too late and the others were looking not so good. So we used an item to teleport away. Had to leave behind an npc that we originally wanted to safe.
Second time, also a dragon. This time black. But we didn't know a dragon lived there, we were just exploring. In the end the warlock sacrificed himself so we could flee.
Sounds like you're in an exciting campaign! Dragons should be scary. Well done to you, your GM, and the warlock player! :)
Glad to have found your channel. Easily implementable ideas that are appreciated.
Sincerely,
Some Random Old Guy Who Recently Started the Hobby and Even More Recently Started DMing
Welcome aboard!
quick point about the XP to Lvl 3 thing about tracking HP; that was a thing in that specific sketch, in other videos Jacob has said that he's not overly fond about handwaving HP as his group likes optimising for damage, so taking away HP tracking invalidates their choices. Of course that's jus the approach that works best for his group, not saying it's either good or bad.
I have to agree here. I like dealing damage and keeping track and knowing my damage is making a difference. I would be thoroughly unimpressed if I learned my DM was just "winging it" (thankfully, my DM is too much of a numbers guy himself to take this approach). I can see how it could work for some tables, for sure, but I'd say definitely make sure all of your players are cool with it before doing it.
@@sbq92Honestly, if you are winging it as a DM, you shouldn't tell your players that. Probably. Unless you're absolutely sure the players don't actually care about it.
There are also levels of winging it. You can go completely by feel, work with approximates, or just ignore the last couple of hitpoints the enemy had left, because it was an impressive attack.
balance between classes is important too. It's why I prefer D&D4 of all the D&D versions.
True!
Sometimes it is only after combat is engaged that the difficulty of the encounter becomes apparent. Attacks of opportunity can make retreat a difficult option if combat has been engaged and if the opponents have a similar or greater movement speed, at least for those engaged in melee. Ranged opponents have a better chance, although in the close confines of a dungeon, they may not be able stand so far off. Then you get occasions where the party is effectively locked into combat ('the hill giant causes a rockfall behind you, blocking off the passage by which you entered the cave' or 'you drop down from the high ledge into the dark cavern and then become aware of creatures around you).
This is where you could make the enemy motivations more dynamic. If enemy bandits see PCs retreating, they may just let them go or tell them they can flee if they pay, not wanting to risk their lives any more than they have to. As for the hill giant situation: he may want to eat them, or he has to take them in tribute to a giant higher up the Ordning first, or maybe he ties them up to cook them later, and they can try to Odysseus their way out.
But if they stumble into a boss unprepared and the boss wants them dead, that may be it for them.
Like the other reply implied, just as the PCs may not want to fight to th death, the enemies will rarely have a good reason to kill every single PC. And an escaped being blocked is the GM's choice to lock them in. That can be fun, but I feel like a description of the area should include some possible way to create an opening in that case.
That’s crazy, I just searched this exact thing and you posted it like 5 minutes ago
Haha it was meant to be!
I have to say, me and my co DM barely balance encounters anymore, not to say we don't tweak things on the fly or take into account our player's abilities, but we don't do painstaking labor to figure out how to make the most balanced possible monster. There's a level of trust in the players inherent to that. The most balancing I have to do is to make things more difficult for the players, not easier.
That's a good place to be as a GM!
I’ve done all of those methods at different points and they can all be effective depending on the group.
Excellent!
Awesome video. I have to admit you shocked me here, happy shock. People forget that using Combat as Battle can produce really good stories. Combat as Sport can also work, but it does lend towards an attitude of "If the GM put this encounter here, we can fight and win." I continue to enjoy your exploration of "Old School" philosophy. Again, I'm not against "New School" at all, they both serve purposes, but sometimes going back can bring new and different fun to the table.
Your triangle of the Dice/DM/Player for balance is the same as my philosophy for Emergent Storytelling in RPGs. In many ways they align regardless, as you are suggesting that player agency be the driving factor in events, rather than forcing a specific outcome. It takes your games to a new level once you, as DM, can just sit back and let things unfold according to player choice and result of the dice... with you adjudicating only as needed.
The players balance the encounter is very organic and actually comes from war gaming and real warfare. A small force will not engage a larger force unless forced to, or if they can choose the optimal battlefield conditions in order to win.
I actually wrote a whole blog post about it on our TFOTT site.
Thanks for calling out the triangle! That graphic took more time to make than it should have haha
@@BobWorldBuilder Ain't it the way - it's almost like the seemingly easy stuff actively works to prove you wrong.
Excellent stuff!
One more suggestion:
Have the players encounter a high level NPC _in the process of fleeing_ from a BBEG battle where it took heavy damage.
The NPC should obviously be very powerful - using high level spells and super combat powers as they watch it flee - but the NPC should also very clearly entreat the players to GTFO, because right on its heels is something that frightens the hell out of a high level NPC, and would therefore easily kill the players if they stick around after the NPC warns them not to.
The players _might_ still try to take on whatever the NPC is deathly afraid of, but they can't say that they weren't warned if they all get killed in short order by willingly getting in over their heads.
Ive been reading “The monsters know what they’re doing” by Keith Ammann and it really helps me think about encounters differently. Most creatures dont just throw themselves at death, and many wont even want to fight unless the odds are overwhelmingly in their favor, and it makes planning encounters and running encounter more fun and feel more grounded in the games world
Our group mostly plays 1st Ed D&D, and yes, "run away" is one of our favorite tactics. ;-) I will admit, though, that it sometimes feels a little "fake" that we can always get away, even when it would make sense for the monsters to pursue us and keep fighting. I mean, if the bad guys are winning, why *wouldn't* they chase us and try to finish us off so we can't come back for another try later (which is totally what we're going to do). But at least it's less phony than the DM just arbitrarily deciding when the bad guy dies -- I find that completely ridiculous. At that point, why are you even rolling dice?
Nice! Well if the PCs do try to run away, enemies rarely have a good reason to capture/kill every single PC! So yes, I think for every couple times the whole party tries to escape, the enemies should be trying to at least prevent one PC from getting away.
My understanding is that the PCs are the aggressor in most cases. The monsters are usually defending their home, and chasing down the party risks more casualties, even if they think they'll win. In some situations, the best defense is a good offense, but I think the cost is often too high.
It is almost too much fun to chase the players out of the dungeon with monsters. I love when I get a chance to pursue them. Just seeing the terror in the players eyes is worth every penny. ;)
Well, usually the opposition have taken some hits as well. A monster that's bleeding might have seemed incredibly aggressive, but it was actually tagging Fight in its "fight or flight" instincts, and will stop pursuing quickly when its attackers start to run and it realizes, "Ow, actually that kinda hurts, I'm going to go somewhere safe instead." Intelligent groups of enemies might have a numbers advantage over a retreating party, but if a few of those orcs have stopped to bandage where they're bleeding then the rest might not want to pursue with a reduced force -- or the time spent making that decision might be the minute the party needs to make ten Move + Dash actions and disappear into the dungeon/wildlands.
In many cases the monsters should chase you. You need good, fun chase rules. That will add some realism, tension and fun.
Also on the topic of getting caught, intelligent monsters would not really kill humans as their first option. In pre-industrial times (no mechanization as an alternative to manual labor), humans have huge value as slaves. They might also be held for ransom.
Gamemasters and players often talk about not liking starting an adventure where they're slaves because it reduces player agency...fair enough. But if you got chased by a warband of orcs, caught and became slaves as a result, that's a nice player choice driven way of becoming slaves...and that gives you the whole escaping from slavery adventure to play.
A tried and true method, I ask to help balance, is to ask players, "How do you want to approach this encounter?" See what their end goal is in combat and try my best to see to those results (or failing to get those results). This allows for every player to to do something fun in combat and if things go haywire, say, "you don't need to fight to the death. Running away is an option."
In my view, it's critically important to a campaign to confront your players with enemies beyond their ability to defeat, and then offer them one or several ways to escape or avoid the encounter. I agree with the whole approach you described. Let the players decide who is too tough to tackle.
My only problem about the "cinematic endings" from not tracking hp is that it can make the players feel like the damage they deal doesn't matter.
Great video Bob. I try not to overthink balancing encounters too much. I have noticed that fleeing in 5th edition is a bit tricky because of opportunity attack rules. Usually by the time the group thinks of running, they are so low on HP that they are afraid to take those opportunity attacks. That might be a side effect of the heroic fantasy mindset they are in. These same players were way more cautious during our short Call of Cthulhu scenario.
The struggle to balance encounters goes all the way to the beginning of RPGs. Now recite after me, If it Looks like Calamari or Has too many Eyes - It's Time to Run! :D
Something even Matt Mercer had to start doing on Critical Role: remind the players that the Defend and Disengage actions exist. Either have enemies in skirmishes use those options when the party looks like they're going to decisively win, or flat-out verbally remind the players of these rules. A lot of folks glance over the list of options, read those two, and disregard them because "I'd waste my turn if I can't attack or cast a spell!" Um, no, it's not a wasted action if it gets your character out of a fight they can no longer win.
"Monsters should attempt to run" is maybe the best advice I seem to never see. IMHO it takes incredible amounts of training and discipline to get soldiers to not flee a battle, why would some hungry monster just looking for a snack stick around when that snack becomes more trouble than it is worth? Even a defensive force trying to keep the players out of their home (the dungeon) would seek refuge and reinforcements instead of thinking they could 1v4 a party after watching their comrades fall. Thanks for sharing Bob.
It also adds to the tension when you know there are monsters you've already fought deeper in the dungeon you're going into and you don't know how many friends they have but one things for sure...they know you're here.
My pleasure! Maybe I should make a whole video on that...
@@BobWorldBuilder I would watch that.
With regards to old-school D&D: when I was a kid in the late 80s / early 90s, my dad ran an adventure for me, my cousins, and my uncle. I think there were 5 PCs, all level 1. The first session, we went up against a small group of goblins. Three of us died. And that was the end of that game lol.
I appreciate that you emphasize different groups and different styles! Every group is kind of unique. I've personally been leaning more towards this style of balance, it makes prep a lot easier and usually encounters won't be wildly one sided if you are aiming for monsters that are roughly appropriate for their level.
You are absolutely right, true balance occurs in a work that is filled with risks, even death. The only way for the party to affect balance is to know when to avoid the fight. Too many players expect that their characters are the heroes and that they are never in mortal danger. This makes it impossible to run a balanced game because there is never a threat!
You nailed several ways I handle encounters in different games... in the same video. Neat. I use my own homebrew rules and only look at monster manuals for inspiration, so it can be very hit and miss sometimes with my group. >.
Awesome! :)
Sly Flourish's idea of turning the dials to balance out combat on the fly I find is the best way to keep things interesting for the players
Yes. Balancing the encounter while the encounter is happening is by far the easiest way to do it.
7:04 another thing I like about having encounters even, is that the party is now also incentivized to try and sneak past the enemies instead of fighting every possible enemy head on. This creates a fun dynamic where players have to try and sneak past the guards of a dungeon to save their energy for the big bad or to recover, and gives a little more realism to the exploration, as combat takes a lower priority.
This was a very relevant video Bob! Thanks for sharing!
I typically will have some “one hit” mobs and maybe a few “two hits” as well. For the more boss types, what I do is a line for small damage and a circle for big damage. I start by making a big plus sign then in the four quadrants I put in the X’s and O’s so technically that would equal 50 damage. Then I just kinda gauge how many of those would be appropriate for the monster from there. It’s kinda like how you write the score for dominos. Cuts down on exact math big time!
That's kiiind of my approach, just not all the time. What I do is I run balanced encounters whenever that encounter is forced onto the player, which typically means about 20-40% of the time: one for each time I need to do some exposition to set up the plot of the arc, and then one for the boss fight at the end of the arc. Everything else, what's there is what is there - but by the time the players get to it, they have been given enough exposition to know what's there, make adequate preparations, and/or avoid the threat entirely. But it does mean that there *are* times when I want the encounter to be balanced, and while I'm okay with not tracking hit points (I call it "doing last minute balance"), if I have tools that can give me a good idea of how things are gonna go down, I'd rather use those.
This reminds me of Hankerin' Ferinale's adage that balance is a false god. Definitely some good points here!
Hank is always right!
Love the ‘players balance the encounter’ idea….though I will bring up an instance that a newer DM threw a homebrew dragon at our level 3 party and I was instakilled in the first round of combat from its breath weapon 😂😂 if we’d gone after the dragon/into its lair I’d understand, but it showed up out of nowhere!
One thing I like to point out when talking about balance and old school D&D is the existence of the Reaction Table. In older editions, a Reaction Roll was used when the the attitude of the monsters in an encounter is not known. The Reaciton table is a 2d6 roll with varying results of attitudes from attack immediately to friendly/helpful. The "immediately attacks" result only occurs on a roll of a 2 on a 2d6. Which means every other result means they don't attack immediately.. Players can take some action to avoid an encounter if they wish (with varying degrees of ease).
There is an added layer of possibilities involuved when that group of orcs in a random encounter end up with a friendly result. Why are they friendly? What do they do? What kinds of situations can arise if the party recipricates?
Great vid Bob! Love this advice
Thanks very much! :)
I try to have multiple paths for my encounters. I have my attempt at balancing it (which I get better at with practice). This is if everything goes as expected.
I then consider what to do if the players are doing too well and if the enemies are doing too well. This could be due to poor planning in enemy creation or selection. This could be due to a player forgetting a spell or ability on the sheet that could have turned everything around. Or this could be due to dice rolls. The bottom line is I'm attempting to make it all fun.
If the players are doing too well, I just let that go often enough. Unless it is a boss or something like that, there isn't a reason to take away the players feeling powerful. I just had this experience in the last session that I DM'd. One PC ran into the enemies before they were ready. I had this story moment built up, and through sheer PC shenanigans, they ended up taking on the enemies in a way not intended.
Other options here could be a bigger, badder monster busts through the wall and starts attacking everyone. Maybe the towns guard shows up and arrests everyone for some reason or another. Or maybe there is some secondary objective that goes off, e.g. the flame following the trail of gun powder finally makes it to the barrel.
The other is if the enemies are doing too well. This could be something simple like the players are taken prisoner. Examples from the previous paragraph can work here as well.
I like this method, because it gives a large amount of wiggle room for balancing, and it also can allow the encounter to go different ways. Sometimes, I'll even like some of the alternate stuff well enough to make it into the original plan.
This is a good approach. Having elements enter or leave a situation makes it feel more dynamic, and keeps the players engaged with the unpredictability of it all. Also the notion that not every enemy wants to murder the PCs: if they're nobles or part of a guild or from a kingdom that loves its citizens, they might fetch a good ransom. (Not to mention that so many cultures in the game are slavers and might want some free labor out of the PCs.)
Always good to leave yourself options! Well said!
My problem with running away in 5e is that it is hard to asses when a fight is out of hand. Someone going down and dying is hardly a rare occurence, happens almost every fight, as the most resource efficient heal is healing word when they start dying instead of healing when they healthy and up.
Also there is no rules of running away, just the normal combat, so if the enemies just harder, but not because of the terrain, nothing stops them to just simply pursue you. I know calltrops can help, but if the terrain is too open it is not feasibly, and not a lot of way to stop pursuers on an open terrain.
I think if about 1/3 to 1/2 the party has gone down at least once, the party should be thinking about escape. Remember that if the PCs do try to run away, enemies rarely have a good reason to capture/kill every single PC!
@@BobWorldBuilder That a good rule of thumb, unfortunately we usually play 3 players, and that dangerously close to a TPK - probably that is probably the biggest problem, is it harder to "balance" D&D 5e at a low player count.
The real problem with retreat in 5e is opportunity attacks and most everyone has ranged attacks.
Rules and mechanics like that is why I roll my eyes at tables that take to long
Bob's out here preaching the good word, again. But we're not retreating, no, let's call it retrograde progress!
Haha I'll take it
"I am retrograde advancing away from the big baddie for today." :D
I do not track the HP of bosses. The kill it, when they are out of spells, HP or new ideas.
I do track HP of usual mobs. That way players can "meta-game" a little. They know that the goblin is easy to one-shot, but a usual orc will take a beating.
For me D&D is about making your players - the heroes. And to be a "hero" you gotta earn it. "To get the treasures you need to kill the dragon". Treasures are worthless, if you didn't "deserve" them.
And sometimes an epic death is also a part of a hero journey.
So I might even plan a PC death in advance. But I do it really rarely, when the plot provides.
Nice!
It feels so good when a first level party of two survives a few rounds against a Narzugon.
I actually didn't fudge any rolls.
Great video bob!
Glad you enjoyed it!
That is absolutely brilliant!
A player once came to me and said that they wanted to play a new character. I convinced them to keep going for one more session because I had something in mind. My players never really run from monsters so I decided to send an extra strong one against them that killed that player that wanted to play a new character. The group found out that this was an extra tough enemy and the player that wanted to play a new character got to do that. His old character even got to have a super heroic sacrifice moment so that the rest of the party could run
I still think the characters themselves should feel close to equally awesome each storyline and working with rewards and weaknesses is handy for that.
I like the permission for unbalanced encounters as long as the party has the permission to announce an escape.
Back when I was in larp there was a “fair escape” rule, where there was plot armor to get away if at least half the party was still up.
The notion that combat is dangerous and you could actually die is at the heart of old-school RPG revival, and honestly makes games a LOT more fun as a player. You can still have epic moments, but things feel a lot more real.
This video really hits the nail on the head. The best secret to balancing is... Don't!
Obviously, this doesn't mean throw 10 ancient red dragons at a level 3 party. But if for example you use the random encounters in Xanathar's, just roll with it - Don't change the encounter up. Or, if you do plan your encounters - Use what feels logical and gives a sense of verisimilitude. Would kobolds run at the party and make melee attacks in their cave lair, or would it be heavily trapped and utilize crawlspace that no other creatures can use?
Letting your players balance the game is the best way to do it IMO. Getting them to think creatively and more importantly, *off their character sheet* makes for much better sessions than "I run up and attack" over and over.
I think it's fine to throw 10 ancient red dragons at a level 3 party. If they're not smart enough to flee or hide in that situation then they deserve to die. Encounters where you know you'll die if you engage an opponent in combat can be great fun. eg. steal the healing chalice from the treasure horde of 10 ancient dragons. You have to find a way in, find a way to get past the dragons and get the chalice and find a way out without being fried to charcoal.
Players really have to lose this idea that if you see a monster you have to fight it. There are so many more interesting adventure options.
First encounter in my main campaign I had the PCs ambushed by bandits while traveling to Bruglum Village to meet the village head. They killed the bandit leader and another two in the first round so I rolled for morale and the bandits failed, except one of them. That one kept chasing one of the PCs around but the rest fled for their lives. Since then the PCs have fled the occasional encounter, and avoided others such as the flying black dragon that decided to chase them when they found their spelljammer in a vampire's castle and installed a helm they dredged up from the bottom of the ocean (but before they outfitted the ship with sails, rigging, weapons, furnishings, etc), though they often try to suck it up and prevail through encounters I put in to warn them off some route or another. So far it has worked pretty well for them.
I love that last point. If the players encounter a pack of wolves or an owlbear or some other beastly creature that is just there to eat the adventurers, it makes perfect sense for them to run away. A pack of wolves would never fight to the death. Even in Breath of the Wild, if you encounter a pack of wolves and kill one of them, the others will all run away.
One of my most memorable combat encounters actually involved retreating almost right away. We weren't super high level, but one of the players decided (for reasons that I'll not get into) that they needed to fight a celestial. The rest of us, immediately seeing that it was a losing fight, headed for the hills. In short, the instigator got completely bodied and everyone else had fun dodging the celestial's cronies on the way out the door.
I feel like one of the reasons it was fun is because it was NOT balanced, to the point that a character had to die. We got a taste of what its like when the enemies throw some real power around, and we were glad to get out with our hides. Other players will probably have a greater level of attachment to their character, but I think unless it alienates the player completely, losing a character isn't the end of the world.
Thanks, Bob. I love you.
I remember early on in a homebrew campaign I've been running that I had a room with constructs so withdrawing was in fact an option. Most fights have been heavily skewed in the player's favor, but we are only about halfway through. To keep immersion while allowing retreat means giving monsters a reason to not pursue. Whether it is a time sensitive ritual or being physically confined to an area monsters should have their own plans on what to do with their time.
Very useful, thanks.
TRUE! Just because there's 1 goblin in the hall, doesn't mean it's not a trap with a dozen goblins that can TPK if they roll well. A DM's adventure is not a video game, it is a person making shit up on the spot.
liked 1st room, there is a sleeping ancient dragon
Don't wake it up!!
Maybe it's friendly?
A quest giver?
Hungry?
Bored?
An illusion?
The barbarian taps it on the nose and says hail beast!
I absolutely LOVE the idea of an encounter with bandits in which, after the first casualty, they freak out. "Dear gods! They just murdered Kenneth! For what, a few gold? Let's scram!"
This is pretty great, and the MCDM Flee, Mortals! new method of CR balance is also pretty phenomenal!
Great stuff friend 👏 👍
Thanks!
Great video!
Idk man, just take 2 Spectators in a room, and let the players try to survive.
Should be fun so long as they’re under lvl 6 lol
Clearly the true message of this video lol
Escape is a vital mechanic for a group to understand. I DM'd two TPKS in AD&D back in the '90s. One was just a bad party-splitting decision, could've happened to anyone. It caused me to become determined that the next party wouldn't die in their first adventure, so there were 12 people in that party (five PCs and a bunch of allied NPCs), all sneaking up on the dungeon that was an evil cult's temple in a forest. Except, the cult had two trained wolves standing guard outside. My dice were average, but the players' dice were awful. Result: two wolves killed 11 people. Only the magic-user escaped -- having used his Magic Missile in the first round, he hid in the forest in hopes of sniping with a slingshot, but wound up escaping in the end by riding the dead druid's donkey out of there. A 12-member party defeated by two wolves. The dice were wild, yes, but the other issue was that the party bunched up, didn't separate archers from close-in fighters, and didn't run even when half of them were dead.
I roll Savage Worlds. "How I balance encounter" is the "How I mine for fish" of our forums. (almost) All dice explode, so fights are REAL hard to predict. Totally dramatic!
I've been doing this in my 3.5 game for 6 years now. I drove home at early level that there's big stuff happening in the world and they're either going to have to avoid some fights or be very clever about it. In their first year they took down a nest of mind flayers by calling in a favor from an order of paladins, and many times they talked their way out of things that would've been impossible to fight through. It's been easy to prep and it leads to more diverse gameplay
My players just steamrolled an encounter that I had planned would be deadly. Now, mind you, it was the hardest fight they've been in, the barbarian dropped to half, but the party still fought through a small army of harpies, a pair of manticores and a harpy boss. The thing is, they first saw this encounter like 6 sessions ago, and went "oh shit" and spent several in game days solving problems for a faction to get reinforcements. The end result was they ran through the encounter and felt badass the entire time. On one hand, I was bummed the party didn't struggle as much. On the other hand, the barbarian wrestled two manticores at one point like a total BAMF. So they balanced the encounters, and they've been having a ton of fun.
They've noped out of four or five encounters already, and tricked enemies into killing themselves one time even.
Amazing video!!! However, I am still leaning towards some number crunching... although the "not counting HP" actually made me think... In any case, GREAT GREAT video! Congrats!
Thank you!
Ill give this a try!
Remember to signal how dangerous things are, and remember that if the PCs do try to run away, enemies rarely have a good reason to capture/kill every single PC!
The Monsters (may) Know What They're Doing, but the players need to too.
Well said!
I'm a big fan of not tracking HP. I've done boss fights where I hadn't a clue how much health it had and just made it cinematic, and that was a lot of fun. Instead of watching an HP bar or trying to track damage, the players just had to go by descriptions of the attacks done. "Your axe rips a chunk out of the dragon's leg" means you hit it pretty good. "You swing for the head but only manage to chip a tooth" - alright, technically it hit but not much. Plus, all these wounds affected how the boss moved/acted. It was neat, but that also wasn't in 5e.
But what I have been doing a lot lately in 5e is just saying "this mob has 2 hits", or "this boss has 12 hits". That's it. No damage. Just gotta hit it. So much easier and simpler.
I say add a tpk in where it makes sense. Ie they all die invading the wizard castle so the wizard reses them and questions them before sending them on a task. Also let's them know they won't always win
About 12-14 months ago I forfeit the idea of trying to “balance” encounters and simply setting the difficulty to whatever makes sense to the world. The players can choose to engage with the threat or not. Even in high-stakes dungeons/encounters, the players can balance the risk/reward of running away or coming back at a later date. Usually, the players “outsmart” me and either use a spell to a creative degree, or MY PUGILIST RIPPING A TREE FROM THE GROUND FOR A 3d6 BLUDGEONING WEAPON TO SMACK ENEMIES AROUND.
I love this game
I'm glad you said this. I believe encounter balancing is a waste of the DM's time.
I agree. You end up making everything too safe because the dice always throw a wrench into things.
I had a level 3 party find a Stone golem, with no magic weapons, and few spells left. They would have been destroyed, but they had a Special robe of useful items that allowed them to choose the patch effect. They opened a 10ft pit under its feet, then put an iron door over it.
One issue with "abandoning the fight" in 5e is if *anyone* decides to take a few swings or the enemy manages to close the distance (as often happens, for a variety of reasons), Opportunity Attacks make combat *sticky*; people often can't get away if they disengage and move (because any enemy who hasn't taken an action can dash and catch up), but don't want to risk an opportunity attack. If you get rid of opportunity attacks (for both sides), you'll discover a decreased reluctance to run from a fight.
Another thing -- maybe not what you're after if you like fighting stuff -- but something I learned from playing Hot Springs Island using (slightly modified) 5e: getting 0 XP for killing things totally changes the attitude to fighting. Negotiation and running become the main strategies. Took some getting used to but actually it was way more fun than I'd have expected
I agree fleeing is 100% the way to balance all encounters, however many RPGs lack a dedicated flee mechanic built into them, leading to tpk. For 5e I would recommend if at the start of initiative a party decides they want to flee, a chase skill challenge begins irrespective of the players positioning on the battlefield.
Just feel the table out...how the rolls are going... Don't try to predict it all or prep it all, don't track HP of every monster (or in my case any), just monitor spell slots, player HP and action economy... Just watch your players, and see how the tension rises or falls with each roll. You do that, and all the balance you need will work out perfectly. I have been a DM for 24 years now, and it wasn't til about 10 years in that I learned that trick.