Question on luring monster

[Chongo]

KageKeeper - 12/9/2006 11:08 PM  

My rule of thumb is if I HAVE to lure the baddies out one at a time to survive an encounter, it is probably over my head and I need to get help or find another place to be.

 That, I think, is an excellent rule of thumb to have.

 It's an admirable rule of thumb, but I don't know if it's realistic. In fact I'll say it's wildly unrealistic and will put that person at a significant and unfounded disadvantage. There is not one person on this server that I've seen not lure. Not one. If it takes greater then a group of level 6+ 20-37's to take on the *full* encounter of a +3 (mithril or emeralds) item spawn... then it's time to reconsider balance vs. tactics. Until then I'll stay alive going for what a caster can get at level 15, and follow suit in basic luring.  I don't feel bad luring groups of 2's and 3's of drowrogues off diamond spawns. They can still ruin my day and the risk is wild for something that yields a raise dead scroll or two. I certainly don't feel bad in partaking in the lure of 2's and 3's off emerald spawns. No one traps creatures in immovable spots, no one uses abusive tactics to create unrealistic impossibilities. But so far I've not seen one person who assumes the travel of voice pertains to the natural balance of the world. You simply can't formulate generalizations on realism versus mechanics.  I'm sure that in an ideal world the realisms would pertain, that the bell toll would resound throughout the drow city and 1000's would come running. But the reality of the system is clear here, and it shows a distinct sense of retrobalance towards logical playstyles. That is, pulling a fragment of the 8 creatures spawned, and dealing with them in a fair manner that doesn't abuse walkmesh.  The staff seems to effectively balance to a level consistent with what AI can do. This explains the fact that it takes so many player resources to get to the bottom of the underdark, or likewise the bottom of the rift. These are +3 and +2 CNR areas respectively. By caster magic level that is level 15 and 10 respectively. It is clearly balanced so that you need to be intelligent in dealing with the enemies there. And by 'clearly', I mean that if it takes a 32,24,24,21,22 and 23... (well balanced in all class facets)... to get a +3 CNR in a manner that involves luring groups of 2's and 3's, then it's clear that was the intention.  My rule of thumb is that you should never:  - Trap enemies in natural features so that they can not move - Trap/ confuse enemies via varying cliff levels - Corner trap enemies using AI lock-ins that won't wrap around a corner - Trap enemies on AI lock-in's (around corners or level breaks) using AoE spells to slowly kill  But by all means:  - Lure 2's and 3's under the usual stress of major risk of that massively powerful spawn - Use bottlenecks to manage the masses of enemies in a favorable sense to your group, as long as they aren't 'dumbed' by the bottleneck you're using (i.e. there's another avenue of getting to you that they could take, but is out of range of what their AI picks up) - Use bottlenecks to plant AoE spells in favor of your effort, as long as they aren't 'dumbed' by the bottleneck you're using - Plant spells like SoV, Blade Barrier, fogs, fire walls, etc... in the path of their anticipated attack if that helps your cause.   The general rule of thumb where you shouldn't have a bad conscience after using a 'tactic' is pretty fair. But everyone's learning curve and/ or progression on the scale of normal NWN AI is different. So it's hard to measure things on conscience. Please correct me if I'm not keeping to the intent of the server. That said, if I'm not, then it's time to re-evaluate the retrobalancing due to normal player tactics, and the baseline responses towards access vs. balancing as a whole. Because it's fairly clear, especially with +2 and +3 CNR's, that the intended behavior planned upon involves luring, and that any individual that assumes full realities of carrying sound/ group bahavior will be hit with overly punitive balancing.
  There's only so much you can do with the NWN engine and available AI systems. I say just don't abuse walkmesh.

[Ioskeha]

There are a few of us out there that do not lure, Chongo.  I personally feel it's cheap way to gain XP.  If I, or the party I travel with, can't take a full spawn out myself I leave it alone.  I've left parties before because I did not feel right with the idea of lure.  Like I did today before I posted my question.

[Chongo]

And hey!  That's good to go.  I've got no problems with varying playstyles and the degree of reality you wish to adhere to.  It's fun and we all of us change it to enhance roleplay as it suits the situation.

Just understand that the leading developers have what they have to work with, and that the myriad and variety of developing individuals on staff over the past years has yeilded many standards that simply don't allow for full onslaughts.  And that is the general sense of balance that I've gotten after travelling with many 'forefathers' of this server.  Survive by luring, just don't abuse walkmesh AI.  This is what the several generations of builders on this server have ultimately yielded, for better or worse.

[ItalianDDog]

No problem Ioskeha and no hard feelings. I completely understand where you are coming from. But dont be avoiding my PC because you think I abuse game AI cause I don't.


@ Chongo -- Very well written/said.

[EdTheKet]

The zone may be small to scale, but they are suppose to be huge.

That's not correct. If we wanted to build huge caves, we'd use large areas and make them huge caves. Most caves are not thousands of feet, and on a side note, sounds carries and echoes very well underground so everyone would hear sounds of battle. It's just that NWN isn't programmed to handle that.

Nice rules of thumb Kagekeeper and Chongo.

[Falonthas]

and another thing higher level chars will spawn more difficult trolls in this instance if im not mistaken
so the low level group would get regualr trolls  and the mid teen group would get more beserkers and shamans

[Ioskeha]

Oh you're right, Falonthas.  I had forgotten about that.  Thanks for reminding me.

[Drizzlin]

EdTheKet - 12/10/2006  2:33 AM

The zone may be small to scale, but they are suppose to be huge.

That's not correct. If we wanted to build huge caves, we'd use large areas and make them huge caves. Most caves are not thousands of feet, and on a side note, sounds carries and echoes very well underground so everyone would hear sounds of battle. It's just that NWN isn't programmed to handle that.

Nice rules of thumb Kagekeeper and Chongo.

How can you say this, and then turn around and say "now pretend Prantz is a huge city" or that "hlint is not small, it is rather large". You can't have it both ways. Which is it? Small when you want it to be, and large when you don't? hehe

[Nehetsrev]

The way I envision the scale of the areas is like this (whether my own interpretation be right or not is another question):  Each area is as big or small as it appears to be in-game, however, each area only repressents a fragment of the landscape that is more interesting or more prone to holding encounters than the vast stretches we don't see that lie between the areas we do see.  For example, if you look at the 2 areas between Hlint and Fort Llast, it would seem like your character is only walking at most a quarter mile or so total between those two cities/towns, but what you're not seeing is the areas in between The Goblin Wastes and The Road to Fort Llast, and even those that are between The Road to Fort Llast and Fort Llast itself, which are likely several miles worth of road that are less prone for whatever reason to hold encounters with goblins, or bandits (mercenaries), or have any significant scenic or landmark value.  I hold that these unseen areas span several miles, and thus the scale issue in the actual areas we can play in becomes moot.

The same idea can be applied to cities that span multiple areas.  It is quite likely that between Hlint and Hlint Eastside there is a good deal of town we don't see becase it holds only the dwellings of the locals which are primarilly of no interest to our characters who pass through.  Also, as is the case with most cities in Real Life, there is often a good deal of 'sub-urbs' outside the walls of a city (or city limits) where many who form part of the comunity have their homes, farms and other places of employ.  A good example if you've ever been there is Nurnburg Germany, where you can go to one area of the city that holds the old castle the community was founded around and you can literally see the 'Wall' that surrounded that part of the community and that structures were built both within and outside that wall as the city out-grew it over time.

----

Sorry if the above is off topic for this thread, but it is related to issues of perception that were brought up in regards to the subject of the thread, and may help to clarify those issues for others.

[Dorganath]

Off-topic also, but remember too that there is a whole lot of Layonara (probably on the order of 90%) that you simply do not see in-game. That doesn't mean these places do not exist.
  On the scale thing...we are limited by what NWN gives us. Try not to let OOC mechanical issues influence your character's perceptions.

[Leanthar]

"......EdTheKet - 12/10/2006 2:33 AM


The zone may be small to scale, but they are suppose to be huge.
That's not correct. If we wanted to build huge caves, we'd use large areas and make them huge caves. Most caves are not thousands of feet, and on a side note, sounds carries and echoes very well underground so everyone would hear sounds of battle. It's just that NWN isn't programmed to handle that.

Nice rules of thumb Kagekeeper and Chongo.


How can you say this, and then turn around and say "now pretend Prantz is a huge city" or that "hlint is not small, it is rather large". You can't have it both ways. Which is it? Small when you want it to be, and large when you don't? hehe......"

Actually that is partially correct Drizzlin, sadly though. The problem we have is that the modules are already about 8x larger than they are supposed to be for NwN (and we have four of them). So...in some cases we try to build to scale (such as caves and dungeons--but not all of them) but in some cases we simply can not (like exteriors -- forests, mountains, cities etc.). To build to scale it would require probably about 12 servers all running modules of the size that we currently have. Since we have four we are about 1/3 of the size of the actual world.  

With that said... we do what we can where we can. It is already a large world so I think we are doing just fine at this time.

[hawklen]

Interesting thread.

In the forest of mists, I lure the max amount of giants I can take on, 4, well away from the other 4 giants, cause I dont want party poopers on the little party I am having Sometimes only two follow, or three. I have no problems doing this. hawk has a tendency to run up to a group, drop darkness and poke them in the rears with his shortsword.

Now, if ony I can get groups of bugbear archers on bugbear island to follow me, instead of standing there and shooting me

[Sab Kaylag]

A question to what L said above, does that mean as a rule of thumb interiors such as caves and houses are set to scale and exteriors such as forests and cities are not?

My next thought on this is would creatures nessasarily always call their friends.  I mean wolves would that for sure but would ogers, or mercenaries?  I would think that if something looking out for it's own good above the good of its group saw something it thought it could kill and eat/loot it would probably try to do that with alerting as few members of its group as possible.

Im not saying its right to lure nor am i saying that i do i am just saying from an RP standpoint it seems reasonable for creatures to try getting something without letting the others of their kind know that that person/peice of food is there.  

This of course wouldn't be true for lawful creatures nor animals that hunt in packs and probably a variety of other sorts.  So some thought will be need to put in if the creature Might act that way if thats the way you decide to play but i, from an RP perspective not mechanical, see little problem with doing it to chaotic creatures who look out solely for themselfs, goblins as an example.  (hobgoblins are an example of a creature you couldn't do it to as they're Lawful and will follow the rules of reporting problems to their superior.)

this is just an opinion of a player here, if this is an affront to anyone I appoligize sincerly.
Richard

[Gulnyr]

Sab Kaylag - 12/12/2006  3:10 PM

I would think that if something looking out for it's own good above the good of its group saw something it thought it could kill and eat/loot it would probably try to do that with alerting as few members of its group as possible.

Just as a counter example, if personal gain and greed are the norm for, say, goblins, and one goblin wanders off, wouldn't other nearby goblins take note and be curious about what the wandering goblin is doing?  Cultures based on looking out for one's self might tend to breed a lot of nosy paranoia; "What's happening over there?  I need to know what it is!  I'm missing my chance at something!  Someone could get more than me!"

I'm not saying you're wrong, just pointing out that there are lots of possibilities, many of which are way beyond what NWN can do.

[Hellblazer]

here is my two cents, In any kind of situation you will always have the dumb guy who thinks he is stronger alone than he is with his friends. When you go into the haven mine thats the ogre type, enters rage and runs after you even if there is an other ogre right beside him (same line of sight, same tyle etc) that does not come after you. Now, RP wise, it is wise and fundemantl correct to lure one openant to have a better advantage. Please tell me that, if you went into a cave even with a good force, you wouldnt want to go home and see you children and wife, so you would make EVERY effort in doing so. And this also means being smarter than your enemies and taking advantage of their weaknesses. That is proper RP and it is what this world is about RP.
  If you say that some of them get suck, Like in the mist forest or Cave.  I know of a place where there is a door that is much smaller than the giants, how in layon green forest did they get in there anyways?? You give us the world to play in, you should expect us to also use it to our advantage.
  it absolutly makes no sence of asking us to do things only when it is right to do so, to have big numbers and all then go rush into the group and even witht he big numbers risk of loosing one because of the rush and chaose that would bring. In war, you always try to bring your enemy to where it is better for you to fight, so would you do in game, try to separate a big group into more manageable groups and make them come to you're well defended spot, all fronters in line making a great wall, teh caster behind ready to cast down a myriad of spells, the healer standing ready to heal their comrade, Whe? becuase this is proper tactics, its what they are made for and they know how to better ustilise their skills than a giant who has the same inteligence of a simpleton, who would quite frankly run in without thinking.
  This is what they do, they are not bright, they dont think they react. unlike our players who most of them are able to understand the tactic of one when explained to and then do as what he is told. Most of the time anyway, they will at least be 2 that will come.
  Frankly I dont like the idea of limiting so much the possible rp of the players because there is the limitation of the game. we all accepted those limitation when we bought the game. And in such, in their lives, ther character that we play would absolutly take advantages of every situation to win and survive their enconters. its like saying to an archer who knows he has the advantage over the fighter, hey get down on his level, barely out of reach, and then if he gets pass througth the front line, oh so be it. It makes no tactical sence. Archers will find the best spotted place where they know the will most likely not get reached back unless by the same kind of foe he is. the Mage would do the same, using all their spells to their advatages, calling on their sumons to go in front frot ehm, while they cast on it and on his foes from behin, probably some where where ti would be safe for him to do so.
  You also have to think of one thing, when you go down in a cave, after killing everthing, it would absolutly be logical that if there was nothing left when you go out, that the likly hood of having the same numbers of foes come back to hunt you is off.
  When you kill everything and make sure none get pass you to get reenforcement, there will be no re-enforcment. the same way if you go in haven mins, the ogres would have no where to get renforcments as they are the only Ogres in the area.
   My point is you take our advantages out, but let the ai have a lot over us, by the respawns and spells that are beyoung their capabilities. For you thats fine, and for us too. But yet, when we properly rp going about things. for you it is not.
  Thats all I am saying. RP wise, they would use all to their advantages, and this world is supose to be all about RP.

[pejsaboy]

Here's one idea. Not saying it's a good one, or a bad one, just a thought. Rather than having spawns of a handful of creatures [like 8-10 berserkers in one room in Haven mines] have a spawn with 2, or 3 creatures. But, make those creatures much tougher. More hitpoints, better armor class, higher level, etc. Rather than having 3 ogres beating on you, you might end up with one beating on you twice as hard *shrugs*

This helps avoid the abuse of AI by lessening the fear of being surrounded, but still calls for the players to come up with tactics to survive the encounter. It would be a huge amount of work to change all the spawns server-wide of course, but it could be done slowly over a couple months or whatever.

Of course like I said, it's just a thought, not a suggestion I'm making.

[Hellblazer]

That idea is not bad at all in fact.

[pejsaboy]

Well I'm glad at least one person shares that idea. I personally have always wondered why the spawns were larger groups rather than less and tougher creatures. I'd prefer the latter myself.

[Jilseponie Wyndon]

But to do that, you are raising the challenge rating and making an area, say for lvl 8's become an area for lvl 10's.  It changes things.  You do this wit hal lareas, there will be no place for lvls 1-5 to go without being killed all the time.  If you want to reduce the spawns, say a standard group of 10 ogers, break it up and place the smaller spawns about the room.  Not saying that it is a good idea, but  Iam sure the team set it up the way it is for a reason and to make any kind of change to it, would mean a major haul on the system.  I think another way should be thought out.

[memilies]

Everyone seems to be forgetting rogues in all of this (and even rangers maybe..)

Isnt luring monsters away supposed to be part of their job? So say you have a big group of big dumb ogres. Of course if a big shiny paladin stands in the doorway two of them aren't going to break away without shouting for the others to follow. But a sneaky little halfling rogue would know how to create just enough of a little distraction, like throw a rock or make a little sound, or reveal himself for a second then dart away, so the two big dumb ogres wouldn't know what they saw or if they saw anything at all. In that case the ogres would not be likely to shouts for the others, they would go check it out for themselves.. Because after all it's probably just a small animal or something and they don't want to look like fools for shouting for the others to attack if it is...