The World of Layonara
The Layonara Community => General Discussion => Topic started by: Ioskeha on December 09, 2006, 06:17:00 PM
-
Has the rules changed for luring? The last few weeks I've heard of a lot of people using this tactic to take down spawns that are much harder then what their PCs can normally handle.
-
As far as I know that is and always will be a big no no.
I believe it falls under "Abusing AI" in the rules.
If a GM were to see this...things could be interesting. :)
~KK
-
I've been seeing it alot too, even on quests.
but, I guess a better question would be: what exactly IS luring? you see a bunch of ogres, and drag one or two out to get mutilated? right?
-
As far as I know, that is correct.
It is using the AI against itself. Slowly approaching so one sees you and follows you instead of the entire horde.
In reality, if one creature saw you, it would alert all of the others most likely.
~KK
-
I think what you are refering to is just smart tactics.. catching the attention of one enemy and drawing into an ambush is not illegal, rather smart battle tactics. The luring that is refered to is to engage a single or group of enemies, then run and draw them to an NPC for them to assist in killing them. For instance attacking a giant outside prantz then running to the guards outside the city gate to help kill it is against server rules. It uses the AI of NPC's to kill things rather than facing them in fair combat. Using smart tactics against a group of foes however is quite allowed and often necessary even in a well balanced party.
-
I agree with this. Charging into 20 Epic Rogues is not a smart move, no matter who you are. Being able to lure half a grooup of mobs away first and deal with them, rather than having an enitre spawn, which at high levles can be much more nasty than Ogres in Haven ( yes its possible :D ). See thats just plain smart.
-
Unfortunately, due to game mechanics, there's a very fine line between "smart tactics" and "abuse of AI".
Picking one creature at a time out of a group because of perception limits is borderline abusive at best. Bringing the whole spawn into an ambush can be considered smart tactics. Getting creatures trapped by geographic features is abuse of AI. I think you can see a pattern emerging. :)
The best gauge here is common sense. Or perhaps a simple question: Does this feel wrong or like cheating?
If the answer there is "yes" then you probably should not be doing it.
I know this is a little vague but to get specific will open this discussion up to a bunch of "what if" scenarios.
However, let me state clearly that it is never acceptible to drag monsters back to friendly NPCs in hopes that they'll take care of the monsters for you.
-
Gunther spends some time in the swamp of reawakening, fighting the swamp zombies (or whatever those things are). I've found that if I fight more than three at a time, they tend to run all around and through Gunther's avatar and through each other, until I get the message that whatever Gunther's target is, is not within reach. And Gunther then just stops attacking and stands there like an imbecile. All the while, they seem to be able to keep hitting Gunther. As these guys hit for some nasty damage, it doesnt take much to obliterate hit points and bring a character down, especially if your character just stops fighting (even for only a couple seconds).
As such, I will readily admit that I try to lure two or three to Gunther for a fight that doesnt involve Gunther just stopping and standing there. A lot of the times, I still lure all four of them, which makes it real dicey on whether or not the above will happen or not.
I hate doing it. I'm happiest when I fight all four of the spawns (without the above happening) and manage to survive and beat them, as they're tough opponents for Gunther and its a real close thing sometimes (which is the best part of the fights to me).
Do I feel its wrong to lure two or three of them? Yes, I do. But its a bit of a quandry, as it also isnt right for Gunther to just stop fighting in the middle of a fight and stand there getting a beat down.
If somebody would like to weigh in and give an opinion on whether this is abuse or not, I'd appreciate it. If it is, then I'll find some other swamp for Gunther to go and play in.
-
I play this "fine" line that some are refering to at times, and I never feel like I'm cheating or "luring". The map/zone is small, but in reality it is suppose to be a huge cave, or huge city (Prantz for example). When you walk into a room, everything spawns in a central location and walks around, This is the AI and the game mechanics. In truth, we should wait until the creatures roam about, like they would be in a normal situation, and then start picking them off. Would they call for others? Sure they would, but thier allys would have to run all the way across the dark caves or town to be able to help. The zone may be small to scale, but they are suppose to be huge. An ogre may not hear his body fighting or calling for help if he is across the cave (which could be a thousand feet away). I take all of this into consideration and I do not feel dirty, or like i'm abusing AI.
It was once even brought up that AoE casting on a group of mobs, at the spawn point was cheating/abusing AI. The reason being is that the mobs spawn in one location and it was abusing AI. So why would charging them all at one time be any different? I rather like, and think it is more realistic to fight a few at a time, and then the other creatures in the room roam into range of the fight and join in.
I of course NEVER use AI to trap or abuse a creature so it can not fight back. That is just common sense.
-
If the AI were more than "aha, I see you, charge and attack," then it wouldn't be abusive to use terrain to one's advantage. Certainly, if it were a real situation, then they could call their allies to attention. However, were it a real situation, they may show more creative counter-strategy than "aha, I see you, charge and attack" all the way from the simpleton ogres to something as brilliant as a drow archmage (okay, so in that situation, it's "aha, I see you, cast spells until you kill me").
All I'm trying to say here is that we work with what we've got. This wouldn't be an issue if Bioware hadn't failed so fundamentally in creating AI for their creatures.
-
Dorganath - 12/9/2006 7:03 PM
Getting creatures trapped by geographic features is abuse of AI.
I am not sure I agree with this. Fighting a giant or group of giants or any bad guys in an area that is too small for them to flank or suround you is good tactics. You choose the terrain for battle (art or war)
-
jrizz - 12/9/2006 7:11 PM
Dorganath - 12/9/2006 7:03 PM
Getting creatures trapped by geographic features is abuse of AI.
I am not sure I agree with this. Fighting a giant or group of giants or any bad guys in an area that is too small for them to flank or suround you is good tactics. You choose the terrain for battle (art or war)
I don't think you and Dorganath are talking about the same thing. There are places where creatures can get trapped by their environment where they shouldn't; e.g., in the forests of Mists, giants can get stuck behind the tents when they come after you. If they do, and you just stand back and pick them off from a distance, then that's an abuse of the game AI.
Fighting a group of giants on a bridge, for example (where only two or three might be able to get to you at a time) is acceptable, I believe.
-
Okay.. so lets say a level 7 or so PC goes into the Battle Fens and lures one troll there at a time. That would be considered smart battle tactics?
-
Boxcar - 12/9/2006 11:27 PM jrizz - 12/9/2006 7:11 PM Dorganath - 12/9/2006 7:03 PM Getting creatures trapped by geographic features is abuse of AI.
I am not sure I agree with this. Fighting a giant or group of giants or any bad guys in an area that is too small for them to flank or suround you is good tactics. You choose the terrain for battle (art or war)
I don't think you and Dorganath are talking about the same thing. There are places where creatures can get trapped by their environment where they shouldn't; e.g., in the forests of Mists, giants can get stuck behind the tents when they come after you. If they do, and you just stand back and pick them off from a distance, then that's an abuse of the game AI. Fighting a group of giants on a bridge, for example (where only two or three might be able to get to you at a time) is acceptable, I believe.
Correct Boxcar. I am talking about "trapped"...like by a ridge or other geographic feature that prevents advancement or short-circuits the pathfinding AI. A choke point (i.e. a bridge) is something entirely different.
-
Ioskeha - 12/9/2006 11:32 PM Okay.. so lets say a level 7 or so PC goes into the Battle Fens and lures one troll there at a time. That would be considered smart battle tactics?
There's no single answer to that question.
If said troll wandered far away from the group, then sure...pick him off. If by exploiting the perception range of NPCs only a single troll out of a group came running at that character then that is abusive and should not be done.
Again, a little common sense goes a long way.
-
I totally agree with jrizz, smart combat consists of using the terrain to protect your flank and rear, using archers and mages to target enemy mages to prevent them from casting, biting off small digestable pieces of larger groups, etc, etc. Otherwise what you are left with is drunken dwarf tactics where everyone runs in and has a slug fest, the most hit points wins. That is not r/p of combat, that is hack and slash and against what I feel is the spirit of the server. Half the fun of going into combat is the planning phase where tactics are decided and tasks assigned. To say that you have to engage a whole spawn at once would take the whole idea of a balanced party and throw it out the window. I agree it is a fine line between abusing the AI and smart play, but I would have to think that the AI was created as it was for a reason, that being to make tactical smart combat more of a factor than how fast a person can hit the mouse button to bash a target. Monsters were made to roam for a reason, otherwise they would just stand in a group back to back and wait for a party strong enough to come kill them. I for one would hate to have to deal with a group of giants in a tortise or phalanx formation, giving you no option but to engage the whole thing at once. Level requirements to engage spawns would go way way up and light armored high dex PC's would be about obsolete as even a high dex character can only parry or dodge so many blows a round. That said, if you are in an area and you can only survive picking off single stragglers, or it takes so long to take down a spawn that the next spawn comes up before you can clean up and exit, you are probably doing something you shouldn't be doing. Common sense has to rule when it comes to guaging where you should or shouldn't be. If you are in serious risk of falling to a couple bad guys when you enter a spawn area you should probably be someplace else. 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.
-
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.
-
@Ioskeha. I know say 'PC' you are referring to is me. Because I mentioned it. I did not say that I venture there and do it often for XP. I can count 2 times that I have been around that swamp area. Each time I was passing through to explore. Slipping around the sides. I tried to gather a party together to go there and you said it was too hard. And then you know what I said so I wont type it all out. I didnt go there with the intent of cheating the AI and killing the whole field. I was slipping around the corner of the map as every1 does when they dont want to spawn any encounter. Trying to be sneaky in a RP sense. Doing this there are some points that you can not slip by because the trolls wander to the edges of the map. If there is a group of four. and they are randomly walking back and forth towards the edge. I see no problem in "sneakingly" standing in one spot until say 1 or 2 run over to me so I can clear a path to continue the 'sneaking' through the area. Like Dorganath said... Common sense goes a long way. Personally dont need you to come on the forums for a question about me that could be easily answered. I appreciate that you did not mention my said PC name. But if you asked me a bit more information before hand this post would never have been required.
Once again in a RP sense if I was sneaking around the corners of the map I see no problem common sense wise with picking 1 or two off.
IF I were to take out the whole map for the purpose of XP then there is a problem.
I simply said to you that I have 'lured' one or two out of a group and they were no problem.. hence there were 5 of us that I wanted to go.. so being a group of 4 or 5 trolls shouldnt have been a problem being you were all my level. The trolls are not that much off for a lvl 6 7 and 8 with a good group.
Have a good night and enjoy your Layo time ;)
-
I'd say it is abusing AI game mechanics, but not any more unfair than low CR casting monsters with unlimited spells above and beyond an epic wizard PC, or spawnpoints of large, unsneaky monsters who show up out of nowhere on top of your party with no opportunity to spot or listen check them. ;)
-
That's what strikes me as a bit odd, ItalianDDog. I've gone to the Battle Fens with my higher level PC with group twice as large as the one we were in. Were the other PCs were all level 14+. Those Trolls are not as easy to take down as you make them out to be.
And, no I did not use you as an example. I used a scenario similar to what your PC said in-game. I didn't know for a fact that you were really luring Trolls one at a time. And when I asked you about it in a tell you didn't reply. I could have easily used any of the other ten I've seen in the past few weeks since I came back to Layo. One time I was out in the woods sneaking around with my Druid when I saw someone lure 1 Treant away from the spawn, kill it, and do it again until each Treant was killed. When I asked the person about it he told me that luring was common on Layo. That a lot of people do it. This has been a question I wanted to ask since I heard this. You just reminded me to ask.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
Oh you're right, Falonthas. I had forgotten about that. Thanks for reminding me.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
"......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. :)
-
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 :D
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
That idea is not bad at all in fact.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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...
-
I'm not saying make the spawns tougher. They would retain their current CR, only have fewer creatures. I'll use the spider spawn in the Sielwood as an example. Gilli [level 10] normally spawns 2 small spiders, 1 or 2 giant spiders, a phase, and dire spider on top of the ettercap. So thats a total of 6 or 7 creatures. I don't know what the appropriate replacements would be, but just to explain the idea I had, the original spawn would change from 6 or 7 varied spiders, to maybe 2 or 3 Dire spiders and the ettercap.
-
I would much rather face 10 normal spiders than 3 dire spiders. The dire spiders hurt and hit easily, while the others dont.
-
Jilseponie Wyndon - 12/12/2006 7:47 PM 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.
actualy jil, having more lower thing hitting you at the same time will make more damage than let say one tougher oponant. If you take for instant 6 lvl 7 ogres ( dont know if that exist) vs on lvl 10 ogre, the 6 will do more damage by hitting you at the same time
-
Layo is partybased -> Spawns are large
Spawns become small -> Solo'ing becomes easier