On the constant overestimation of animals in rpgs

[raniE]

In so many RPGs, especially from earlier in the hobby but often continuing today, various animals are given simply outlandish game statistics. The wolf is the most often seen example of this, although bears are certainly not exempt from the practice. Take TSR D&D. A wolf is a 2HD creature in the Rules Cyclopedia, a 3HD beast in AD&D 2nd edition. Even in 5e a wolf is just as tough as a bandit (which is a downgrade from before but still quite tough) and does more damage and has a better chance of hitting than the bandit does. Bears are usually portrayed as uber-monsters. A brown bear is tougher than an ogre and its claws do as much damage as a longsword (well, an arming sword).

The Fantasy Trip has a similar take on them. Wolves are pretty much just better than a starting character, except in intelligence, and a bear compares favorably to a giant. Bog gold Book BRP has wolves being as strong as men and doing more damage. This shows up in various other games as well.

Meanwhile, in the real world, here's a list of wolf attacks and you'll note that fatalities are quite rare, especially among adult males. And those are still usually unarmed when attacked by the wolf. As soon as they invented weapons, our ancestors became the apex predator of this planet. And sure, sometimes even an armed man would be killed by a tiger, but I don't think I've seen any case where an armed adult male was killed by a wolf, and yet they're portrayed in games as amazing killing machines that can rip through a medieval soldier in full kit.

So, what's with this overestimation of wild animals compared to humans? Not all games do it, Mythras seems to have a much more realistic take on the wolf (an animal which weighs half of what an adult human does and whose claws are not in fact three feet of steel), but its still pretty prolific.

 

[Cowboy Duck]

Maybe they had to evolve tougher to compete against owl bears and magic? Of course, that kind of logic only leads to Synnibarr's winged laser-shooting grizzlies.

 

[Silverlion]

It's funny because I think superhero games often underestimate animals a bit--but that may be the default because it's supposed to be heroic humans taking them on. But it looks funny when someone given an animals powers is stronger/more effective than the animal they draw inspiration or power from.

 

[Brock Savage]

Housecats were a terror to commoners in 3x/d20.

 

[EmperorNorton]

Housecats were a terror to commoners in 3x/d20.

IIRC the odds went way up if the commoner used the grappling rules, but who the hell would want to try to use 3.x grappling rules. The commoners, understandably, just choose to die rather than having to understand grappling.

 

[Brock Savage]

IIRC the odds went way up if the commoner used the grappling rules, but who the hell would want to try to use 3.x grappling rules. The commoners, understandably, just choose to die rather than having to understand grappling.

Also those figures quoted in the post reflect a "fair" fight with an armed commoner. The cat has overwhelming superiority against commoners armed with farm tools at best and we're not even considering the cat's levels in stealth.

 

[raniE]

Yeah in most systems I wouldn’t even bother to stat housecats. The scratches you can get from a cat just shouldn’t register in a system where a normal human has around 4 hp.

 

[Vile Traveller]

My apparently quite competent half-elven wizard-warrior type got his ass handed to him by a fox. Rolemaster.

 

[zarion]

I know a few guys that would disagree wholeheartedly! They work trap lines in Northern Canada and won't leave the camp without a firearm. All of them are very wary of the bears and wolves that live in the area. Bears are huge, solid muscle, and carry long daggers to gut you with. Wolves hunt in packs and are freaky stealthy. Personally I think very few TTRPGs get wildlife even close to what they should be. I've been too close to bears for comfort, and had wolves follow me and a buddy for several kilometers. Yeah, wildlife can be fucking dangerous! Ever been close to a fluffy cute little deer, those antlers are like swords on their heads! Moose are absolutely titanic, good luck stopping it from crushing you! Cavalry is stupid effective because a horse will knock you down and crush you with little to no effort. All I can say is it's a good thing animals don't fight, they hunt, there is a significant difference between those two things! Also, have ever been attacked by a cat, not just "it scratched you and ran away" but actually attacked. I know a girl that was attacked by a stray. She went into shock and had to get multiple lacerations stitched up, and she was the kinda girl that was in bar fights. Animals in TTRPGs are never done right IMHO.

 

[Gabriel]

Yeah in most systems I wouldn’t even bother to stat housecats. The scratches you can get from a cat just shouldn’t register in a system where a normal human has around 4 hp.

 

[zarion]

Yeah, cats can fuck you up!

I also just remembered an article a few days past about some poor bastard in Africa that got dragged out of his hut and eaten be a pack of hyenas. They figure there were six to eight animals. Animals can be fucking dangerous!

My African Grey Parrot wraps his beak around my fingers sometimes and gives a gentle bite. Then I watch him chew blocks of wood apart like it's nothing. The only reason he doesn't bite my finger clean off is cause he likes me.

 

[PolarBlues]

Not to mention geese.

 

[raniE]

I know a few guys that would disagree wholeheartedly! They work trap lines in Northern Canada and won't leave the camp without a firearm. All of them are very wary of the bears and wolves that live in the area. Bears are huge, solid muscle, and carry long daggers to gut you with. Wolves hunt in packs and are freaky stealthy. Personally I think very few TTRPGs get wildlife even close to what they should be. I've been too close to bears for comfort, and had wolves follow me and a buddy for several kilometers. Yeah, wildlife can be fucking dangerous! Ever been close to a fluffy cute little deer, those antlers are like swords on their heads! Moose are absolutely titanic, good luck stopping it from crushing you! Cavalry is stupid effective because a horse will knock you down and crush you with little to no effort. All I can say is it's a good thing animals don't fight, they hunt, there is a significant difference between those two things! Also, have ever been attacked by a cat, not just "it scratched you and ran away" but actually attacked. I know a girl that was attacked by a stray. She went into shock and had to get multiple lacerations stitched up, and she was the kinda girl that was in bar fights. Animals in TTRPGs are never done right IMHO.

Yes, smart people to not leave camp without a firearm if there is dangerous wildlife about. And in most of these systems, the wolf will take a bullet that would put a man down and keep coming and then eviscerate you even if you also happen to be wearing chain mail. Wildlife can be dangerous. Now tell me, which would you rather face, a wolf or an armed and armored human? An unarmed but fit adult human male with no significant physical handicaps will beat a wolf in hand to hand combat most of the time. Give the human a weapon and the wolf stands nearly no chance. This happens over and over again, and these are wolves who are fighting, not hunting, because they're rabid (the most common reason for wolf attacks). Most people are noting that animals in packs can be especially dangerous. Indeed, and the right stats will let a pack of say hyenas or wolves be dangerous, without making an individual wolf out to be a much abler fighter than an armed military veteran.

 

[Tulpa Girl]

Honestly, it's less a matter of overestimating their abilities (although that may occur) than they are often written in adventures as being much more hostile and aggressive than they usually are in real life. Unless you stumble into their nest or territory, or directly threaten them or their young, most critters generally aren't going to go out of their way to attack a human.

Well, okay, there's geese, but then they are the devil's fowl.

 

[raniE]

In a system where an ordinary human being has 1-6 hit points, a single hit point of damage would indicate wounds that would lead to hospitalization in the modern area. A wolf in Mythras does 1d4-1d2 points of damage if its attack hits. An average human has 4-7 hit points per hit location. A pack of wolves can thus bring down a lone human quite efficiently with just a few hits. But a lone wolf is at a general disadvantage against a single human. That's the right balance to strike.

 

[David Johansen]

Rolemaster's Tiny Critical Table is fun reading. It really gives a sense of a vicious little animal just tearing up the target. My players feared Tiny crits more than huge ones. But here's the thing, the tiny creature will have a high initiative and defensive bonus but it's offensive bonus won't be all that high. It's the open ended rolls that get you.

 

[Giganotosaurus]

Honestly, it's less a matter of overestimating their abilities (although that may occur) than they are often written in adventures as being much more hostile and aggressive than they usually are in real life. Unless you stumble into their nest or territory, or directly threaten them or their young, most critters generally aren't going to go out of their way to attack a human.

Well, okay, there's geese, but then they are the devil's fowl.

Seriously! I swear it's like every animal in every game/RPG/etc. has a grudge against humans and will suicidal charge to their deaths.
When I was growing up, wolves and grizzlies were starting to make a comeback in the area and my mother (who worked for the Forest Service) would always give me advice on the dangers of wildlife.
Wolves weren't a big threat to people as they only attacked humans when rabid or starving, they do go after cattle though which could be an adventure plot.
Bears and Grizzlies in particular can absolutely fuck you up, and I have no doubt that one could kill an armed and armored knight. Seriously go watch the Grizzly Bear attack scene from the Revenant, it's scary how big they are. That said they aren't crazy aggressive, but can be provoked into attacking.
Cougars were the ones to watch out for when I was growing up, mostly because kids don't stand a chance against them. I'd say from my limited experience unarmed/unarmored adults are about 50/50 depending on if they're aware of the cougar. Again, cougars tend to avoid attacking people unless their provked or starving.

 

[zarion]

Not to mention geese.

Well, okay, there's geese, but then they are the devil's fowl.

I used to golf at a place where geese liked to hang out. Sometimes in the middle of the round we would just decide to call it quits cause the geese showed up. Seriously, don't mess with geese!

 

[zarion]

Now tell me, which would you rather face, a wolf or an armed and armored human?

Depends, do I have the same arms and armour as the human? If I'm facing the wolf do I get to keep the arms and armour, or am I now fighting whilst naked using only my bare hands? If I can use my hunting rifle, the human cause he will be really easy to see and I can shoot him from far enough away that his sword will be useless and his armour won't stop a bullet...the wolf on the other had will be a pain in the ass as he can hear or smell me from a vast distance.

An unarmed but fit adult human male with no significant physical handicaps will beat a wolf in hand to hand combat most of the time.

Not a chance! As you said in your original post, what makes us the apex predators is the weapons we make. An unarmed human is easy pickings for any aggressive animal of similar size.

 

[raniE]

Depends, do I have the same arms and armour as the human? If I'm facing the wolf do I get to keep the arms and armour, or am I now fighting whilst naked using only my bare hands? If I can use my hunting rifle, the human cause he will be really easy to see and I can shoot him from far enough away that his sword will be useless and his armour won't stop a bullet...the wolf on the other had will be a pain in the ass as he can hear or smell me from a vast distance.

I never said the man had a sword and medieval armor, I said armed and armored. And yes, you have the same armaments as the other human, whether that is a sword and mail armor or a flintlock musket with a long bayonet and a fancy uniform with a leather stock (hopefully this would protect against the wolf biting your throat) or an M-16 and modern ballistic vest and helmet. You keep the same equipment against the wolf.

The point here is that in say AD&D, a brigand has 1-6 HP, an Armor Class between 9 and 6 (lower is better) THAC0 of 20 and do 1-6 damage per hit. A wolf on the other hand has 3-24 hp, an Armor Class of 7, THAC0 of 18 (again, lower is better) and do 2-5 damage per hit. In this fight I'd bet on the lone wolf taking down two or even three of these brigands (maybe more if it rolled massively well for HP), who are armed with shields, spears and swords. In reality I don't think the wolf (who would have to be rabid to attack, but unfortunately rabid wolves do happen) would even manage to hurt any of the brigands, since they've got spears and shields, perfect for keeping a wolf away from them while also stabbing it to death, and then usually padded armor.

Not a chance! As you said in your original post, what makes us the apex predators is the weapons we make. An unarmed human is easy pickings for any aggressive animal of similar size.

Actually yeah. Here's an example of precisely this. Rabid wolf attacked a man, he first hit it with a stick but that didn't do anything so he dropped the stick and strangled the wolf to death. Here's another example, where the wolf actually jumped on his back (so complete surprise attack) and he still killed it without weapons. Here's a story of an old Russian woman getting bit in the hand by a wolf, trying to get it off but failing, then just picking up her axe, while the wolf was still biting her, and chopping it to death. The typical wolf weighs less than 40 kg. That's less than a flyweight boxer. A wolf simply does not have the same strength as a fit adult human male. That's why there are so very few incidents of a lone wolf killing an adult male. Children, yes. The occasional frail old person, yes. Even sometimes a fit adult female, although in those cases its usually a whole pack. But mano a wolfo, even with no weapons for the human, the mano typically wins. Doesn't mean he doesn't get hurt of course.

 

[Brock Savage]

Not a chance! As you said in your original post, what makes us the apex predators is the weapons we make. An unarmed human is easy pickings for any aggressive animal of similar size.

You have to specify the circumstances of the fight. At the end of the day the wolf is just a dumb animal while man is intelligent, creative, and resourceful. A naked man fighting a hungry wolf in a 10x10 box is one thing but in most other situations the human can use their brain to outwit an animal.

 

[raniE]

Seriously! I swear it's like every animal in every game/RPG/etc. has a grudge against humans and will suicidal charge to their deaths.
When I was growing up, wolves and grizzlies were starting to make a comeback in the area and my mother (who worked for the Forest Service) would always give me advice on the dangers of wildlife.
Wolves weren't a big threat to people as they only attacked humans when rabid or starving, they do go after cattle though which could be an adventure plot.
Bears and Grizzlies in particular can absolutely fuck you up, and I have no doubt that one could kill an armed and armored knight. Seriously go watch the Grizzly Bear attack scene from the Revenant, it's scary how big they are. That said they aren't crazy aggressive, but can be provoked into attacking.
Cougars were the ones to watch out for when I was growing up, mostly because kids don't stand a chance against them. I'd say from my limited experience unarmed/unarmored adults are about 50/50 depending on if they're aware of the cougar. Again, cougars tend to avoid attacking people unless their provked or starving.

I've seen the Revenant, and rewatched the grizzly scene a couple of times. Note that while he suffered wounds that most thought were fatal, he did also kill the bear. And this was one on one, where a bear absolutely has the advantage against a human. But we (we as in the species, I never have personally) hunted brown bears, even before the advent of firearms. People apparently thought it was safe enough to go out unarmored, as long as they had spears with prongs on them so the bear couldn't run up the spear. The wolf stats from D&D detailed in my previous post seem a pretty decent fit for a big brown. Against a lone unarmed human it's a monster, but have a few guys and give them spears and we're looking at a more even fight, although still possibly advantage bear if she rolled well for HP, which might be giving the bear a bit of extra oomph than reality would suggest.

 

[raniE]

You have to specify the circumstances of the fight. At the end of the day the wolf is just a dumb animal while man is intelligent, creative, and resourceful. A naked man fighting a hungry wolf in a 10x10 box is one thing but in most other situations the human can use their brain to outwit an animal.

As I've posted above, even in a situation where a man was totally ambushed by a wolf he managed to kill it in unarmed combat. A physically fit adult human in normal clothing beats a rabid wolf without needing to do any advanced thinking, most of the time.

 

[zarion]

I never said the man had a sword and medieval armor, I said armed and armored. And yes, you have the same armaments as the other human, whether that is a sword and mail armor or a flintlock musket with a long bayonet and a fancy uniform with a leather stock (hopefully this would protect against the wolf biting your throat) or an M-16 and modern ballistic vest and helmet. You keep the same equipment against the wolf.

The point here is that in say AD&D, a brigand has 1-6 HP, an Armor Class between 9 and 6 (lower is better) THAC0 of 20 and do 1-6 damage per hit. A wolf on the other hand has 3-24 hp, an Armor Class of 7, THAC0 of 18 (again, lower is better) and do 2-5 damage per hit. In this fight I'd bet on the lone wolf taking down two or even three of these brigands (maybe more if it rolled massively well for HP), who are armed with shields, spears and swords. In reality I don't think the wolf (who would have to be rabid to attack, but unfortunately rabid wolves do happen) would even manage to hurt any of the brigands, since they've got spears and shields, perfect for keeping a wolf away from them while also stabbing it to death, and then usually padded armor.



Actually yeah. Here's an example of precisely this. Rabid wolf attacked a man, he first hit it with a stick but that didn't do anything so he dropped the stick and strangled the wolf to death. Here's another example, where the wolf actually jumped on his back (so complete surprise attack) and he still killed it without weapons. Here's a story of an old Russian woman getting bit in the hand by a wolf, trying to get it off but failing, then just picking up her axe, while the wolf was still biting her, and chopping it to death. The typical wolf weighs less than 40 kg. That's less than a flyweight boxer. A wolf simply does not have the same strength as a fit adult human male. That's why there are so very few incidents of a lone wolf killing an adult male. Children, yes. The occasional frail old person, yes. Even sometimes a fit adult female, although in those cases its usually a whole pack. But mano a wolfo, even with no weapons for the human, the mano typically wins. Doesn't mean he doesn't get hurt of course.

Touche! Also rabid animals don't think like non-rabid animals but I don't want to get into all that.

That being said, trying to reconcile D&D with reality in any way is a futile exercise because it completely falls apart when levels get involved. After all if the wolf has more than one hit die then it is a higher level than the bandits. If one of the bandits were to say get a level increase so they have the same hit dice as the wolf, they would also get an increase in stats and would probably be much more capable of fighting the wolf by themselves. Hell, in D&D if a fighter is high enough level they can go toe-to-toe with a 30ft tall giant!

As you said, Mythras does a much better job modeling reality, hence the reason I prefer it to D&D.

 

[raniE]

Touche! Also rabid animals don't think like non-rabid animals but I don't want to get into all that.

No, almost all lone wolf attacks tend to be rabid animals. A healthy wolf wouldn't have attacked in the first place, but that pretty much leaves rabid wolves as the only examples of man on wolf combat. The predatory attacks from packs are mostly on children or lone wanderers, and even those are rare.

That being said, trying to reconcile D&D with reality in any way is a futile exercise because it completely falls apart when levels get involved. After all if the wolf has more than one hit die then it is a higher level than the bandits. If one of the bandits were to say get a level increase so they have the same hit dice as the wolf, they would also get an increase in stats and would probably be much more capable of fighting the wolf by themselves. Hell, in D&D if a fighter is high enough level they can go toe-to-toe with a 30ft tall giant!

As you said, Mythras does a much better job modeling reality, hence the reason I prefer it to D&D.

Eh, at low levels D&D is fairly gritty and realistic. All of these creatures are sort of the basic creature type anyway, standard wolf and o-level human. But levels do complicate the matter, yes.

As for Mythras, it does do it better, but BGB BRP has wolves that are way more dangerous than a human, so it isn't a sure thing in all BRP systems, unfortunately. The Fantasy Trip does the same thing, although you can fix that by using the dog stats for wolves and using the regular wolf stats for dire wolves. Mythras stands out to me as the only game I can think of that both has stats for animals and doesn't massively overstat wolves and bears (and I'm not entirely sure on the bears, although they look fairly reasonable).

 

[raniE]

Honestly, it's less a matter of overestimating their abilities (although that may occur) than they are often written in adventures as being much more hostile and aggressive than they usually are in real life. Unless you stumble into their nest or territory, or directly threaten them or their young, most critters generally aren't going to go out of their way to attack a human.

Well, okay, there's geese, but then they are the devil's fowl.

I’ve been salty about too tough animals in rpgs for years, but the impetus to write this post actually came from a computer game, The Long Dark, in which wolves would rather go after a human with a lit flare walking on a road than a rabbit ten feet away. Completely ridiculous wildlife behavior. And the game also has the wolves patrolling a frozen lake. Back and forth they walk, back and forth. Completely exposed and in the open, good luck finding any prey that way you bozos.

 

[raniE]

I’d be more afraid of a moose in the woods than a wolf. They’re huge and since they’re herbivores they’re a bit panicky. And they’re seemingly blind too, I’ve been ten feet from one that didn’t notice me until I made a noise, then it got really spooked.

 

[Nick J]

I’ve been salty about too tough animals in rpgs for years, but the impetus to write this post actually came from a computer game, The Long Dark, in which wolves would rather go after a human with a lit flare walking on a road than a rabbit ten feet away. Completely ridiculous wildlife behavior. And the game also has the wolves patrolling a frozen lake. Back and forth they walk, back and forth. Completely exposed and in the open, good luck finding any prey that way you bozos.

Yeah, it's not about the actual physical threat under normal circumstances that wolves pose, it's the way they are played that's the problem. Because I can almost guarantee that if a grown, large wolf was really motivated to attack an unarmed man, their 400 PSI bite force would scare the hell out of me. I wouldn't bet on my ability to walk away from a fight with one, and I had 10 years of freestyle and collegiate wrestling under my belt and I'm 6'1 220 lbs.

 

[raniE]

Yeah, it's not about the actual physical threat under normal circumstances that wolves pose, it's the way they are played that's the problem. Because I can almost guarantee that if a grown, large wolf was really motivated to attack an unarmed man, their 400 PSI bite force would scare the hell out of me. I wouldn't bet on my ability to walk away from a fight with one, and I had 10 years of freestyle and collegiate wrestling under my belt and I'm 6'1 220 lbs.

You’d probably be hurt, but take some heart from the news stories I posted above of unarmed men killing wolves (note, do not kill a wolf unless it attacks you or someone else, they’re endangered most places) and granny managing to whack one with an axe while it was biting her hand. And remember, you have about the same relative weight advantage over a wolf as a brown bear has against you.

But yes, the most vexing part is usually how they’re played, although that is true of humans as well. I must have missed when all bandits became Immortan Joe’s war boys, screaming “witness me” while throwing themselves against clearly superior enemies. Better GMs and in some cases scenario writers are what’s needed to fix that.

 

[ffilz]

I've been thinking about this for my Cold Iron West Marches.

Ultimately I'm setting up a game and as a game, it needs to have interesting encounters that aren't all human, and leaning on rabid animals doesn't work. Why do packs of wolves in the Wulfwood attack armed parties of humans? I that's an interesting question, meanwhile, join in the fight and help us fend them off and maybe we'll ponder the question over beer back at the inn. In the meantime, the Wulfwood wolves are among the nastiest wolves in the world.

 

[David Johansen]

I think to some extent one might argue that in fantasy games you're looking at mythic wolves and bears which are bigger, smarter, and more dangerous than natural ones.

 

[raniE]

I think to some extent one might argue that in fantasy games you're looking at mythic wolves and bears which are bigger, smarter, and more dangerous than natural ones.

That works a bit until they also introduce dire wolves or worgs or whatever kind of bigger nastier Wolf. You can play it that way, but I really don’t think it’s the intent most of the time.

 

[Giganotosaurus]

I've been thinking about this for my Cold Iron West Marches.

Ultimately I'm setting up a game and as a game, it needs to have interesting encounters that aren't all human, and leaning on rabid animals doesn't work. Why do packs of wolves in the Wulfwood attack armed parties of humans? I that's an interesting question, meanwhile, join in the fight and help us fend them off and maybe we'll ponder the question over beer back at the inn. In the meantime, the Wulfwood wolves are among the nastiest wolves in the world.

If you're looking for ideas, PC's tramping through the woods and accidentally stumbling upon a pack that's feeding, or their den is a easy way to get into a fight.

 

[raniE]

PCs can also be looking for the wolves if they’ve been attacking the local livestock or even local children (it happens sometimes, especially when times are lean for the wolves). Thus the PCs may be the aggressors, rather than the wolves.

 

[ffilz]

If you're looking for ideas, PC's tramping through the woods and accidentally stumbling upon a pack that's feeding, or their den is a easy way to get into a fight.

If wolves are to be a "theme" encounter in a region or at least one of the theme encounters, the encounter can't be something specialized like this.

PCs can also be looking for the wolves if they’ve been attacking the local livestock or even local children (it happens sometimes, especially when times are lean for the wolves). Thus the PCs may be the aggressors, rather than the wolves.

Or even this.

They just need to be mean nasty creatures that have a habit of making trouble for human parties whether attacking them, or not immediately fleeing when threatened.

But then I think even many sentient encounters in a West Marches setup are probably going to be more aggressive than logic would actually dictate.

Of course PCs should be able to avoid fighting many encounters with smart thinking, but still there are going to be fights and if those fights are going to be interesting, many of them need to be "close" in some fashion.

 

[raniE]

Depending on the setting you could have something or someone influencing or controlling the wolves. A werewolf or a vampire would be classic. A witch or sorcerer could also work. The wolves could have been turned more aggressive in order to keep people away from the forest for some reason. Something sinister may be going on, that someone doesn’t want anyone to know about.

 

[ffilz]

Depending on the setting you could have something or someone influencing or controlling the wolves. A werewolf or a vampire would be classic. A witch or sorcerer could also work. The wolves could have been turned more aggressive in order to keep people away from the forest for some reason. Something sinister may be going on, that someone doesn’t want anyone to know about.

Yep, those are good ideas.

And back to the original question, the overestimated RPG critters come from a combination of game designers not doing research on real critters or not caring because they are picking stats that look good and work within the context of the game they are designing.

I have in the past based critter stats for Cold Iron on animal weights gleaned from web research, which within the context of the game gives them sort of appropriate ratings, but not really because the game's STR and CON ratings for given animal size are not based on any real life evaluation. Plus two different real life animals of the same rough size could have widely different strength as best as can be correlated to what STR in Cold Iron is.

So in the end, what matters is actually what one wants for the game design...

 

[zarion]

I’ve been salty about too tough animals in rpgs for years, but the impetus to write this post actually came from a computer game, The Long Dark, in which wolves would rather go after a human with a lit flare walking on a road than a rabbit ten feet away. Completely ridiculous wildlife behavior. And the game also has the wolves patrolling a frozen lake. Back and forth they walk, back and forth. Completely exposed and in the open, good luck finding any prey that way you bozos.

My Dad was playing The Long Dark for a bit, but he was playing the story mode and I guess the in game explanation is that there was some sort of environmental disaster that caused massive electrical damage that also had the side effect of driving all the animals crazy. So essentially all the wolves got electrical rabies!

 

[raniE]

My Dad was playing The Long Dark for a bit, but he was playing the story mode and I guess the in game explanation is that there was some sort of environmental disaster that caused massive electrical damage that also had the side effect of driving all the animals crazy. So essentially all the wolves got electrical rabies!

Yeah, unfortunately it really forces all play into one direction in a way I find unfun. Even electric rabies shouldn’t set the wolves patrolling. Luckily for me they’ve added custom difficulty settings now after years of people asking for it and I can make all animals run from me while still keeping the difficulty up on the survival parts. I don’t want to have to do it (I’m fine with being very wary of the bear) but the wolf fear settings don’t seem to do much on their own.

 

[AsenRG]

Yeah, I've been saying that animals are overrated in RPGs for years now. And yes, I know of quite a few accidents where wolves attacked and got strangled by and lone human.
Now a pack would be a different matter. But then the human having actual arms and armour would have almost nullified that advantage, especially if he can put his back to a tree or something.