Withdraw Action

[Kzach]

Original idea: Safe retreat - Circvs Maximvs

A Withdraw action is a special type of action that allows players to retreat from combats that have gone badly and might end up in a TPK.

Far from being a 'Get out of Jail' freebie, the withdraw action comes with consequences.

Withdraw

You can retreat tactically. When the going gets tough, the tough get going.

WITHDRAW: MOVE ACTION.

Speed: Move your speed.

Defence bonus: Gain a +2 bonus to all defences until the start of your next turn.

Saving throw bonus: Gain a +2 bonus to all saving throws until the start of your next turn.

Counter opportunity attacks: Do not provoke opportunity attacks from this movement.

-2 Attack Penalty: Suffer a -2 penalty to all attacks until after an extended rest.

No milestones: The character cannot gain any milestones until after an extended rest.

 

[eriktheguy]

I don't understand, you withdraw from combat but then suffer a penalty until you sleep? Wouldn't a short rest make more sense?

 

[Kzach]

I don't understand, you withdraw from combat but then suffer a penalty until you sleep? Wouldn't a short rest make more sense?

If you make it a short rest, then it's really not a penalty.

You could effectively take on something much more powerful than the group by chipping away it it. Withdraw, short rest, run in at full power unloading novas, run out, rinse and repeat until the challenge is overcome through sheer force of odds.

By making it an extended rest, they're not about to go running back into the encounter since the monsters will be back to full force as well.

The idea here is to allow sandbox play without inadvertently killing parties.

 

[the Jester]

Wow, that looks waaay too good to me.

Straight up no opportunity attacks??

Seems like once you've made a withdrawal, every time you move you might as well do it again.

And somehow this makes it easier to throw off ongoing poison damage or bleeding out a severed artery or something?

Maybe I just don't see the balance here, because it looks like once the party "withdraws" they'll just go take an extended rest to dump the penalty.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Assuming that such guerrilla tactics are even possible (why doesn't the enemy entrench, set their own ambush, or hunt down the party after the first skirmish?) I don't think a -2 penalty would be enough to dissuade the tactic. If one can withdraw ad infinitum, a -2 to hit really doesn't impact nova with encounter powers much. Sure, it might mean you miss an extra time, but if all your encounter powers are effectively at-wills, who cares? The exclusive use of encounter powers (as opposed to a normal fight where you have to mix in a few at-wills) will likely more than make up for the damage lost on that miss.

Of course, increasing the penalty (perhaps to -5) would strongly discourage such behavior. Unfortunately, then you have the undesirable situation that once a party withdraws, they must continue withdrawing until an extended rest (because they have little real chance of victory against anything level-appropriate).

I would suggest making the penalty short term (e.g. until a short rest) and discouraging the use of hit and run tactics by making the enemy react to the players. If the players withdraw the enemy sets a trap, also withdraws to a different location, or calls in reinforcements. It makes sense as, aside from the very stupidest of creatures, being attacked has a way of putting one on heightened alert.

What I'd do is remove the -2 attack penalty and the no milestones clauses. I'd then add:
-5 attack penalty: Suffer a -5 penalty to all attacks until the end of your next turn.
No opportunity actions: Cannot use opportunity actions until the end of your next turn.

That allows players to use withdrawal to move tactically within combat (in addition to withdrawing from combat), though at a hefty (albeit short-term) price. The DM is free to determine whether or not an encounter counts toward a milestone; just make it clear that (under normal circumstances) if the party runs away, the encounter won't count. Finally, if they decide to attack the same group again, they should find themselves at some disadvantage (such as walking into an ambush).

 

[eriktheguy]

I don't see withdrawing, sleeping, and returning to the combat as a viable tactic. Unless your campaign is a static series of rooms with monsters in them , enemies will chase the players, move from the room they were in, prepare for the players return etc.
There was a similar action in 3e, but it only prevented you from provoking opportunity attacks from the enemy you were retreating from.
I don't think this move is overpowered as others have suggested, the penalties for a day outweigh the bonus for one round.
I like Fanaelialae's suggestion for a higher temporary penalty instead of a lower long term penalty. Flavor-wise -2 to attacks for the rest of the day is kind of hard to explain...

 

[john112364]

I'm not sure how you could justify penalties until the next extended rest. That seems rather harsh and unnessissary. I like Fanaelialae's alternatives. I personally would change the "Counter opportunity attacks" rule with a flat "+5 vs. opportunity attacks until the end of your next turn". Basically, the penalty to attacks is applied to defense for the same duration. You are sacrificing a round or two of attacks for a stategic retreat.

 

[Kzach]

Seems like once you've made a withdrawal, every time you move you might as well do it again.

That is exactly the point and purpose of the action.

Maybe I just don't see the balance here, because it looks like once the party "withdraws" they'll just go take an extended rest to dump the penalty.

And where's the problem in that?

Extended rests can only be done once a day. During that time they could be interrupted, the enemy could've caught up to them, or they could just get the full rest and waste all that time.

They then know not to go back until they have a few more levels under their belt and to be wary of that enemy and possible retribution.

The entire point of this action is to allow PC's a chance to get out of a sticky situation. The point of the penalties is to make it something that they can only do once a day.

 

[Amaroq]

Erik, the flavor seems pretty clear: after retreating for your lives, your morale is broken, you don't have the confidence going into battle that you normally would so you take a -2 to attacks.

That said, I'm wondering where this is meant to fit in a party's campaign arc?

The spots it seems most useful to me are Levels 1-10.

By Level 11, my party had one player with a Daily "beam us out of here, Scottie", so the DM could throw high-level encounters at us with the trust that we could get ourselves back out of it if we could recognize that things were going south early enough.

By Epic tier, you have all sorts of oddities where dying is really just a minor inconvenience: Lichs who reappear elsewhere a day later, mages who continue adventuring in Arcane Spirit form, fighters wearing the Ring of the Phoenix, etc. That's where I'd see the "withdraw, come back with all our Encounters, full HP, and a -2 to attack" being a fine tradeoff which parties might use intentionally.

So, at Levels 1-10, your suggestion makes perfect sense to me .. but by Level 26, it seems completely wrong.

 

[Kzach]

Unfortunately, then you have the undesirable situation that once a party withdraws, they must continue withdrawing until an extended rest (because they have little real chance of victory against anything level-appropriate).

I don't see this as an undesirable situation. The entire point is that this is a last resort action. It's not meant to be used within combat for tactical advantage, it's meant to end combat for sheer survival.

Doing as you suggest changes the entire dynamic and function of the ability and makes it a viable once-off ability just to disengage and strategically reposition. That defeats the entire point of making the ability in the first place.

Flavor-wise -2 to attacks for the rest of the day is kind of hard to explain...

Call it the Demoralised condition. Really, this is the least reason not to have this ability in a game.