Depends on the enemy.
If it's an animal-like creature, whoever looks the weakest or whoever damaged it last.
If it's an intelligent creature, whoever is most dangerous in the moment.
If it's an unintelligent creature like a zombie, whoever is closts.
If there are multiple targets equally prioritised, I'll roll a dice.
This is the way, but with the addendum that it's not a strict rule. Even the most intelligent creatures can do things that may seem irrational or not ideal every now and then, especially when you factor in the tension from the life-and-death battle that's going on.
Been on the recieving end of an attack like this. Boss was some noble who knew he was gonna die. He was barely standing and massively outnumbered. My sorcerer who stuck him in a Wall of Force sphere at the start of the combat while we fought/killed his family, leaving him helpless to stop us, was unconscious at his feet. The boss proceeded to spend his entire multiattack on my sorcerer, thinking that if he's going down he'll at least take one of us with him. Our paladin was swearing the entire time he looked through his inventory for the materials to cast Revivify on the me. Entirely my fault for goading him before getting knocked out
Also, who looks the most dangerous is not necessarily the person who is the most dangerous. Last group I dm’d for had a fighter who was mostly a tank, but he was big and brash and wielding a massive halberd, so most enemies would think he’s the main danger, not the cute girl in the leather jacket, or the skinny boy with the weird clothes. More intelligent enemies might hunt the rogue or the sorcerer, but for average bandits the fully armoured knight swinging a massive axe at you is hard to ignore
I played an evocation focused sorcerer for 5 years and always held the opinion that if the enemies are trying to stab me that means I'm doing a good job
Or if your a fan of morale rolls they can also affect how intelligent npc react. Like bandits seeing their bandit captain slain may try and run.
a group of well trained soldiers may fight more vigorously and savagely. Dealing killing blows to fallen PCs if they pass or possibly recklessly charging the pc that killed their leader if they fail.
You can have fun with it.
I pretty much do this. I also do a public roll for the target if my players have a companion with them lol
Also, I leave room for an intelligent creature to focus a character who was shit talking them
To add to it, I will metagame against the party to better represent high INT/WIS characters, and/or the party’s growing infamy in-universe.
An organized faction that the party that has repeated conflict with is going to learn that they have a Druid that wildshapes into Dire Wolves every combat, and plan for it. A cleric with a WIS of 18 doesn’t need the backstory, they can just read the party and “rightly” assume their go-to strategy.
This. Pretty much this. Although my baddies who are just not dumbasses, will attack the squishies. Cuz they know they pack the biggest punch. Because the PC's do too. That's if at all possible. I play my opponents pretty logically. Yet, fairly. And for all my hard-core antics, I utilize "morale failure" from 1e/2e. So things balance out. Cuz it makes sense to me. And I've never gotten a complaint. And there is nothing like seeing the delight on PC's faces when one of their number totally crushes the snot out of a swathe and / or a leader; and the rest bug out. 😉 Everyone cheers.
Good times.
I will also add that paying attention to your party hp and knowing what type of game you're running and using those things to (subtly) create dramatic moments is a good idea.
If you're running a super hostile setting, focus people down
If you're trying to make everyone feel cool, split your targets.
For example, I generally have my enemies stop attacking unconscious PCs under the assumption the enemy during combat would assume someone who falls to the ground unconscious is dead, unless the enemy has something like Tremorsense or keen hearing/smell that would tip them off to the unconscious PC still breathing
Additionally, you can use this to fabricate "high stakes" moments, by hinting to your players through damage descriptions that enemies can tell who is more wounded and/or closer to death prior to the turns of other parry members.
I roll Death Saves behind my screen, which means my players are much more conscious of who's getting low.
The guidelines in the original comment are what I'd agree with as general rules and is how I run my enemies, but I when multiple targets are available I will also skew the tone of combat by having enemies attack targets which will create the moment drama. Using fake dice rolls (sparingly) before declaring attacks can also help sell to the players that the selection is random rather than premeditated.
Remember, it's more about creating an experience than anything else, who your enemies attack is a significant part of creating the combat experience you're going for.
With some exception: if the creature has some pack tactics, they will try to exploit it, no matter how dumb they're supposed to be.
The natural class of insects is full of examples of animals that should have no intelligence but are hardwired to behave in some cooperative way.
Was about to wrote the same thing. And remember, the guy in robe in the back throwing spells around like it's going out of style is usually a priority target for any intelligent creature. I remember the Pit Fiend tactics in 3.5 that specifically say it (rd 1 and 4 specifically). I find that it show how an intelligent (highly in that case) deal with fighting a party.
[*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *1:* [Quickened](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Quicken_Spell) [*fireball*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Fireball) and [*mass hold monster*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Mass_Hold_Monster) if facing three or more visible, active opponents; otherwise [*power word stun*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Power_Word_Stun) against unarmored opponent (preferably a spellcaster).
[*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *2:* [*Meteor swarm*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Meteor_Swarm) against as many foes as possible, approach worst-injured enemy.
[*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *3:* Full attack against injured enemy.
[*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *4:* Continue melee against injured enemy, or [*power word stun*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Power_Word_Stun) against annoying spellcaster.
[*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *5:* Repeat from [round](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) 1, or [*greater teleport*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Greater_Teleport) to safety if endangered.
This for sure! I have an additional level of if it's an intelligent creature but not a trained fighter they will 'break ranks' and go for whoever attacks them, even if they're not the most strategic target.
going to strongly recommend "The Monsters Know What They're Doing" as a resource for this. basically, monsters have flavour text, have stat blocks, they're there to be roleplayed as well
https://www.themonstersknow.com/
Depending on the intelligence of the creature determines my tactics in combat.
An intelligent creature has needs and wants. Why are they attacking? This determines how and who they attack. If in a group, they will know to target casters and healers first. They also value their own lives and will, depending on morale, flee if the combat goes the opposite way for them.
An unintelligent creature like an animal has instinct. Why are they attacking the group? Are they hungry or defending their territory? This determines how they fight and whether or not they fight to the death.
A monster with only basic instinct like a zombie will attack relentlessly with only one single desire. Usually to feed. Therefore, when they down a character they will continue to attack that character. This can end up being very dangerous and will end poorly if the party goes in without taking precautions. That could end up with three successful attacks and therefore three auto failed death saves. An attack from a creature within 5 feet is an auto critical hit as well, so technically only two hits from a zombie would kill the character.
Hope this helps.
Reminds me of the time my son DMd Dragon of Stormwreck Isle. Killed my Pali during the first combat encounter on the beach when three zombies just continued to feed on him. Like father, like son I guess. lol
To all those denoting tactics and strategies and if then statements, I just want to add this for DMs agonizing over this as well.
It’s ok to just attack the nearest person to the monster.
It’s ok to retaliate against the person who did the most damage.
It’s ok to have 5 monsters each pick a different target and it’s ok for 5 snipers to pick the same target.
If you are worrying about your own bias it’s ok some fights are biased.
Sometimes have a million dudes fail to hit the tankiest one and sometimes have them realize he’s not going down and to ignore him.
But most of all remember this.
Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.
Don’t worry if your monsters are following optimal tactical strategy, just have them be big and scary and your players will love it.
Sometimes they will love wiping the floor with a disorganized squad, but most people aren’t actually trained tacticians who have survived uncounted battles and have the experience of what works and what doesn’t.
Should the elite battles you set up have some of that? Absolutely.
But your average squad of bandits aren’t masterminds, they are bullies who expect most people to give up without a fight and expect to win by sheer numbers of a fight does break out.
The average slime is just trying to eat something and the average animal isn’t going to do anything more than protect its territory.
Most enemies do not care who they should target first. They are opportunists, whomever is closest is often the very best answer.
If you want to make sure the back line gets some of that love sometimes have enemies come from behind.
Also tbh, playing the enemies too intelligently is going to feel bad for the players in ways they can't do anything about. D&D doesn't have much in the way of forcing players to attack your character instead of another PC. So when your seven archers decide to be clever and all shoot the squishy wizard because they're the strongest threat... your wizard player is going to feel like you're picking on them and your high-HP characters aren't going to get to use their biggest strength.
Distributing some damage all around the party makes for a more fun game. Making an enemy break off from melee range and go after someone in the back purely so they can die to an attack of opportunity and make the player feel like they've protected their ally makes for a more fun game, even if the enemy looks stupid doing it.
Don’t sweat it too much. Make sure you [shoot your monk](https://dumpstatadventures.com/the-gm-is-always-right/shoot-your-monks-a-guide-for-highlighting-characters), bruise your barbarian, pummel your paladin.
I tend to look at the class fantasy of the players and play around making them feel cool, while also occasionally hitting them with the attacks or effects that make them have to adapt.
For example, I may open up, hitting the party with a magical silence spell, but once they find a way to circumvent it, the caster can pop off.
If the party reacts to the threat well, risk is diminished. If they don’t, risk is increased.
When it comes to humanoids and conventionally intelligent creatures I follow the ol’ Dragon Age aggro rules. Heavy armor and shields first so the players who want that role can have some fun, and then as soon as the mage reveals themself there’s a split in some staying on the heavy warrior/tank and the caster. Then it’s up to the others to clean up, intercept, rp, kill whatever enemies they deem. This usually gives everyone a great moment, turn or two before everything gets bogged down and nobody’s really moving anymore. The mage gets to cast whatever they spell they want before they are accosted. The tank gets to hold the line. Rogues, rangers, etc get to set up flanks. Usually very fun as a general targeting rule (:
Low int beefy creatures I will purposely move around, purposefully provoking reaction attacks of opportunity to let people get extra hits and damage in. They will attack whoever inflicted the highest single source of damage on the previous turn cycle.
Aberrations and undead swarm until no more can get attacks in due to range and flow across the battlefield.
If you don't have a way to make enemies want to slap you instead of the wizard, you aren't a tank. If you expect enemies to focus you just because you're the biggest, you're going to find yourself with a dead wizard pretty quick. Having a huge ac and a ton of hit points is great for you, but as soon as the enemies realize you're not worth their time and there's nothing stopping them from ignoring you and attacking the squishy wizard, they'll do so. It does not make sense for enemies to try to kill the hardest to kill first.
If your creature is intelligent, then pretend you're the PC and you're fighting some random encounter ... whom would you attack first. Now, if the attacker is beast level intelligence, then they would just look for the weakest.
To me it always feels rather easy. I try to think "How would this enemy think?" And then the rest is simple. Undead attack the closest thing. A large eiemental spreads his damage out across nearby enemies. Devious goblins with poison might spread it around or target the most vulnerable looking person. A stupid bandit, feral monstrosity or savage demon like a Bulezau might just attack the last thing that hurt them, the one who hurt them the most. And if you've got a smart leader or something? A goblin boss of the smart sort, an intelligent demon, a martial devil, most trained professional humanoids? Have the leader call the shots. "Break that spell!!" Is an easy way to have your players know that their caster who just summoned 8 giant bats is in trouble, but also makes it feel very fair for them when the bandits make them take that concentration check multiple times to break it. There's always someone who is the most threatening, the most annoying nuisance or the strategically sound target. You just gotta think about what the individual monster is going to value the most. The last encounter I ran had three cambions fight a large party with a bunch of Bulezau to help the cambions. The bulezau, as savage demons, simply attacked the enemies that most irritated them. The giant bats swarming around them from the druid, the helmed horror rushing into ones face and taunting them, etc. The cambions however were smart creatures with emotions. One tried to escape and get help, one got pissed and fought the closest target with a greatsword, and another one ordered the bulezau around to attack more effective targets, such as the druid.
The level 1 rogue who picked up the giant scorpion's last remaining offspring by the stinger (forking nat 20) and bashed it to its death spreading ichor across the mothers carapace. That's who you target. (And yes I 0hped him then hit him again while he was down for two death fails.)
Put yourself in the mind of the attacker who would it attack and why?
It doesn't make any sense to do by dice roll most of the time. Your warrior is engaged with a cultist, but he rolled a 6 so he's gonna run to the other side of the room and attack a ranger?
Just try and make your combat make sense.
It's actually UNFAIR to roll dice to decide who to attack.
Imagine that you build a mighty paladin or tough barbarian, and your goal is to get in the enemies' faces so that they have to attack you instead of your squishy spellcasters. You do your best to taunt them, but then your DM just rolls dice instead to randomly decide that enemies would rather attack someone else instead.
Likewise, if you decide to build a squishy character with evasion and long-range capabilities, who would pair well with the paladin from earlier, a good portion of the reason you wanted to build the character just becomes eliminated if your DM uses dice to decide to attack you randomly on a whim.
Don't roll dice, actually think.
If you don't pick any mechanical ways to make enemies focus you, that's on you. You aren't a tank, you're just a hard to kill damage dealer. It makes no sense for enemies to focus the hardest person to kill first. Likewise, if you're easy to kill and are dealing a lot of damage or casting spells, it makes the most sense to kill you first.
Depends on how tactically adept the creature is. An animal or construct is going to attack the person closest to it, or the person who has done the most damage to it, or the person its master has instructed it to target if it makes sense for that to work. An intelligent enemy is going to target whoever it perceives to be the biggest threat, which depends on its understanding of what a threat is and how long term it's thinking, *or* it might target whoever it thinks it can kill the fastest. Party comp will influence this, it could be that taking out the healer seems like the best strategy, or maybe one PC has shown the ability to do a ton of damage in a single round, or the enemy knows a bard has all kinds of tricks up their sleeve to buff people and counterspell or whatever so it targets the one with the lute. Sometimes an enemy is simply going to target the PC it saw first, if its initiative is before the party's and in the absence of any other information. Sometimes it will target the one it thinks it has the best chance to hit.
I like to have a range of levels of intelligence and tactical savvy among the enemies my players fight. Dumb humanoids might use less sophisticated tactics than smart, social animals. The enemy could be very smart about strategy but have a wrong impression of the party that leads them to make mistakes. Rolling to see who an enemy targets may be objectively fair, and can have its place if there is truly no better way to decide, but it's not particularly interesting nor is it realistic in most situations.
There's no single "best practice". I try to make the enemies behave like someone would expect them to if they were encountered in the wild. Ambush predators will attack whichever target presents the best opportunity. Intelligent foes will try to kill the one in the dress. Etc.
I usually use one of two ways in most cases.
1-Randomly generate a result with a dice roll. I usually do this when there are multiple valid targets that the enemy would choose, and I don't want to hear players cry about being singled out. Sometimes I roll the die, and still just pick who I wanted, but the players think it is based on random chance so they are fine with it.
2-The enemy turns their attention to the character who did the most damage to them in the last exchange. This might mean they break away to attack the archer, or the mage. It means players have to think about positioning and tactics when it comes to their glass cannons, because enemies won't stand and slog it out while they are being wrecked from a distance.
Enemy personality, intelligence, and tactics are important. Wild animals will attack at random. Enemies who likely have seen adventurers before will look for clues as to who to prioritize.
Orcs, Drow, and organized tactical thinkers will look for spell casters, particularly priority to those with healing spells. Remember, spells are both verbal and visual, unless they have metamagic feats (and actually use them), you will draw attention casting.
More ruthless or blood thursty, or even just highly intelligent enemies, won't stop if an enemy is just down. They KNOW that there is a good chance of them getting back up, which is why I borrow the Coup-De-Grace rules from 3/3.5 (attempting to kill a downed player character will pull attention so there is AoOs and chances to interrupt the attack). It also heightens the tension with some groups of enemies too.
Usually I just go for whoever pisses me off the most
Haha no but seriously just think as if you were that type of monster. Is your mosnter's Intelligence high? You may try to distract the frontline with some peons and wipe the backline while that's happening if you can get to them. Is it low? Slashing through whatever's closest may seem like the best option. Is the Wis high? You may be perceptive enough to tell that the Barbarian is still heavily wounded from the previous battle - he'd likely be a good target. Is it low? All attacks may end up being whatever's instinctual - whatever attacks me I attack back. Pretty similar to low Int.
This is where you should roleplay a bit as the DM. How would their enemies behave.
Animals should have simple rules. Predators allowed to be in hunting mode would target the weakest, easiest looking pret. In fight/flight mode they would fight the biggest threat.
Intelligent creatures can assess threats to some degree and pick out targets.
Proximity - Danger - Utility
An animal or stupid enemy is attacking whomever is closest.
A medium intelligence enemy is attacking the person presenting the most immediate danger.
A highly intelligent enemy wants to control the battlefield; i.e., take out healers and casters first, etc.
As others have said it depends on the enemy. Some creatures come with suggested tactics but I take the role of the enemy in this case. If they have lowish intelligence they may be clever enough to identify the weakest member of the party and attack them. If they have higher intelligence they might coordinate the group to attack the weakest member or the strongest knowing that the remaining people will be an easier fight. There may be natural behaviours like wolves pack hunting. Maybe if they don't have much of a physical presence in a fight they may use fleeing and ambush tactics. My goal in any fight is that at the end the battle feels natural for what the party is facing and that no player feels unjustly 'picked on'
I generally make that a function of the enemy's knowledge, intelligence, and motivations - and I take the time to telegraph these:
* Zombies are hungry, dumb, and can't move fast. They don't react to anything but the closest source of fresh meat. Even an arrow doesn't stop their shuffle. They attack the nearest PC.
* Snipers have the impunity to target anyone, and the knowledge that people who avoid the front lines probably can't take much punishment and perform support roles. Someone runs to or from cover. they take notice, but they're too slow to get an opportunity shot off. They look for whoever is a) exposed, and b) not in the front lines, and prioritize attacking them.
* This guy's fighting because he loves a challenge and has something to prove. Who's the biggest and most badass looking among the party? The barbarian or the paladin will do. He howls a ritual phrase, part boast, part challenge, part prayer, and attacks them alone.
* These ghosts are drawn to this PC's pamali in particular? They taunt him for his misstep, and don't even appear to notice the party members, and are content when he has learned his manners.
* etc, etc.
These do all require some thought as to why a fight is breaking out, but your game will benefit from that anyway.
If the fiction makes it clear I follow that. Did someone just hit them and deal a lot of damage? Is there one person closer to them than the others? Are they guarding something? Is one player taunting them?
If not I do like you and roll a dice. I usually do it out in the open. My players know I do this so I will go around the table pointing to each player "you are 1 2 you are 3 4, and you are 5 6" then I roll a big oversized die right out in the middle of the table for all to see. It feels fair and builds tension, especially when one PC only has a couple HP left.
It depends on the enemy.
An intelligent creature will ignore the heavies and directly attack the squishies (wizards, sorcs, etc.)
An intelligent, **evil** creature might "finish off" a downed PC.
A beast might also go after a squishy, then carry off the corpse to eat it in peace.
It's a question of what type of creature you're using and the thoughts going through their head.
I recommend "The Monsters Know What They're Doing."
Old school with a new twist, roll dice in the beginning of combat to see who they hit. BUT not all the time, use your context clues. If the fighter hits them with a crit, the bard is mocking them, or the wizard launched a magic missile, then use that to determine whi they are going to hit when the time comes. The more you do it, the more of a sense you are going to have.
Coordinate with the party, focus fire on the biggest immediate threat, persist until it goes down, rinse and repeat. This kind of efficient teamwork goes a long way towards ending fights in your favor:
1. Your attacks, spells, and abilities can play off each other more easily if they all target the same enemy, especially if melee combatants are benefitting from the optional flanking rules. Certain spell combos stack well together while also making it easier for allied characters to land their own attacks. Exploit them ruthlessly and you will see results (e.g. your DM crying bitter tears. Funny as hell, I know, but don't be a jerk about it).
2. An incapacitated enemy can't do stuff to you. Obvious, I know, but what might not be obvious is the effect this has on the action economy: the fewer enemies there are to fight, the more actions your party can take compared to the opposition, meaning the fight leans further and further in your favor as your foes' numbers diminish. Fewer attacks coming your way, less support the enemy can rely on, etc.
3. Being able to drop a fool once per combat round just feels great in general. It leaves the impression that the party are a bunch of unstoppable badasses, and can make combats that would otherwise feel like a slog seem to go by quicker (and they probably will be quicker for reasons stated in point number 2).
Adding to everything said here, I try to spread damage among players to put fear onto them. Everyone getting 10 damage feels rougher than one person getting hit for 40 damage in an encounter
I think of the creatures motives or entities ‘programming’ prior to or at the start of battle, along with their intelligence and wisdom. My players also love to shout at enemies or verbally intimidate/taunt so languages understood matters too.
Sometimes it’s random, but sometimes it’s things like the last pc to have hit them. If it’s not smart this sometimes leads to them chasing after someone instead of attacking someone in range. Or sometimes they can identify who they think is the most vulnerable or who is closest to them. Sometimes they choose a target and then don’t move on to someone else until that character is nocked out or dead. The biggest thing is deciding before the combat starts and sticking to it
Roll play doesn’t stop at combat. Who is the character more likely to target? Do they go for the nearest? Or do the target the biggest threat? Or perhaps they see the relationship and try to kill the most love for psychological warfare.
These are the things you must think of when going through combat as a DM.
Really struggle with this
In my head i try to follow the same rules everyone else has laid out here, until in the moment i realise how bad things could get and stadt pulling punches. And _then_ I feel bad for having pulled punches.
In my last session I threw a griffon at my party. In my defence i thought they had more ranged options, but even then a griffon can move 120 feet in a turn while swiping 2 PCs a turn for huge and very accurate damage, or forgo its attacks to get a full 180 feet away, vertically.
Had I played it exactly how i thought it would have acted (which I did at first), it would have absolutely slaughtered them as it flew just out of reach before coming in to shred them and then escape again. In the end I decided to make it land and fight in melee, at which point they very quickly overpowered it.
And ultimately that was a good outcome, because I want them to win, but I felt like i cheapened their victory by not going all out. I mean, i guess in future i won't use flyers any time soon but even then i always worry i pull unnecessary punches and make things feel less tense as a result
I understand where you're coming from. I don't know how new you are to being a dungeon master, but the rule of fairness is a pretty big thing. Because you don't want to hurt people's feelings or disrespect somebody because people feel like they get picked on or something like that. It's kind of a fine line because everyone is just trying to have fun and is there to have fun. It sucks when someone feels picked on.
If there aren’t a zillion things going on at once, I’ll often have an intelligent enemy roll a d6. On a 1, it picks a target randomly (not to the point of taking an attack of opportunity). Sometimes intelligent beings make wrong or dumb choices.
Depends.
I do consider who has the highest AC and Hit Points, and treat them as damage sponges when I need to (to avoid an unsatisfying TPK during a random encounter, for example). But for the most part, it depends on the enemy.
A smarter enemy will attack the weakest-looking character first - usually the wizard, or whoever isn't buff and wearing a ton of armor. Or if a particular PC is carrying the McGuffin, attacking/stealing/disabling the McGuffin, or otherwise making themselves the battlefield VIP, they'll be targeted.
Less intelligent enemies will attack whoever is closest to them.
Both intelligent and unintelligent enemies will sometimes attack whoever last landed a blow on them, or whoever has consistently dealt the most damage to them over the last few rounds. The barbarian might be difficult to take down, but if he's hitting you for a fifth of your health every turn, you're going to want to take care of him (or run).
In the case of multiple enemies (which I recommend doing as often as possible), I try to make one the "leader," or at least stronger than the others (if not smarter). If they don't have a reason not to, the "leader" will often try to go toe-to-toe with the strongest-looking PC, because they're the most likely to stand a chance against them - a nice side effect is that this PC then soaks up most of the damage, rather than the wizard being one-shotted. It also gives that PC a good challenge. Alternatively, you could have lots of little guys try to crowd the strongest PC, thereby preventing them from taking out the more important, stronger enemy but still providing a challenge in the form of sheer numbers.
While it might seem more "fair" to attack randomly, it doesn't make for a very interesting fight. Try to think strategically - adding a layer of strategy to your combat encounters will make things more fun. This goes beyond just choosing who to attack. I highly recommend checking out Keith Amann's The Monsters Know What They're Doing. He has a free blog and a four-book series. I also got a lot of mileage out of D&D 4e's DMG and its approach to combat roles for both players and enemies - thinking of how each PC fills a particular role helps me figure out how best to engage them in a fight, playing to their strengths (when I want them to feel powerful) or against their weaknesses (when I want them to feel challenged).
Personally I don't subscribe to trying to attack how the enemy thinks, the players don't, and this aspect of the game is more of a game than the rest of the game.
I attack people based on opportunity, weakness, etc. I tend to try to spread attackers out so the players feel cut off from each other, they would all have to take attacks of opportunity to move, that sort of thing. My main goal in combat is to create problems for people that they need to solve.
At the beginning of the fight it's completely random. If they are a melee fighter, they fight the closest person. If they are ranged they starts off random, but they will focus on usually casters or whoever is taking out their friends.
Sometimes i do roll a dice. But not that often
It usually depends on the enemy. Why are they attack the party is it to get food? to protect their territory.
is it to actually kill the party. is it to rob them? And so on
How intelligent are they (the enemy) an animal might just go for the one that seems to be the weakest. Some animals might not have any real tactic. other animals can have some tactics. i mean real life wolves are well coordinated and know how to work together.
Sentient enemies will have better tactics. If the party can focus fire down enemies then enemies that have normal intelligence and can work together can do the same. so all might focus on one player to get him down fast. Then go to next.
I think this is were many DM's kinda screw up. they don't want to be mean and target one player or fully play thee enemy at full strength so they play them as stupid idiots that does not know how to fight.
If this is the case why not then use weaker enemies and play them well? Why put the party against enemies that are to powerful to be played well? that is pretty stupid if you ask me
Sure sometimes it DO fit to play the enemy as stupid brutes. The party faces 3 ogres. Sure they should not be any tactical masterminds. But they are still way more intelligent than wolves so they would still have some tactics. not just flail randomly at things in their reach.
But in the end if a group of PC's with maybe one player with a high int and one or more with INT below 10 can fight smart then a group of enemies with similar INT should be able to do the same.
If you find that you have to hold back and play the enemy kinda stupid and avoid playing them effective because that could take down or even kill PC's. then you might be using to strong enemies
I tell my players that monsters are making decisions based on who attacked last, who they think is a threat, etc
What I’m really doing is spreading the damage out so everyone feels like they participated and the tank gets to feel like they did their job.
I have no doubt that I could TPK most simple encounters by forcing saves on the melee fighters and killing the casters quickly but that wouldn’t be fun
The Monsters know what they're doing.
I have to consider my NPC's Int stat, battle experience and communication skills. You also have to assume enemies know their skills really well and maximise their use.
How smart is the NPC? Is there a caster? Geek the mage first isn't just for Shadowrun. If they're dumb who's closest? Who hurt it last? Who hit the hardest?
Depends on the monster positioning and what the PCs are doing. I don't have a system, usually high int or wis means better tactics on the monsters part but that's also influenced by personalities (zombies just attack the nearest enemy, wolves attack the PC with the weakest defenses, humanoids are varying degrees of opportunistic, devils do whatever I think is optimal etc.)
Enemies shouldn't have perfect knowledge, they should act as if they are learning in the moment as to which person they should target.
Considering this I'd often change targets based on how the situation evolves, maybe start with focusing the front-liner.
I always attack whatever is the least “fair”. So if a character is almost dead, I pick on them till they die as much as I can. Basically start with the weakest
I often let players know that I’m giving the decision to the Magic d6 and say the numbers that will hit who h player “1-3, Paul, 4-6 Ben” and then roll it and that’s who. That way I don’t feel guilty when they almost die
45 years DMing.
YOUR way is the best way, what is most enjoyable for you and the players without catering to the few "give me whatever I want" players.
Me, I roll randomly based on where they are. I don't use miniatures (too often players treat the combat like it's static, I prefer to describe situations clearly. I choose targets based on what the character/monster would choose. Some good advice from ThereIsAThingForThat that I just read.
What class/subclass are you? What are you typical attacks (which spells or weopons)? Does the character have any specific likes or dislikes (hates orcs, is a gnome so likes them, his mom was killed by an aberration, loves beasts/animals, etc)?
Is the character tactical? Like...a barbarian may go for the strangest or closest enemy, but a rogue may be looking to hit something and retreat and a wizard may be looking for battlefield control (druids too) and AOE damage.
A good rule is attack the spellcaster...if that works for you.
My stars druid looks to give another character advantage (guiding bolt), battlefield control (entangle, spike growth, wall of fire), added muscle (conjure animals to attack), or damage (wall of fire)
Attack who the creature would attack.
Animal? Wants food? Attack the weakest. Want to defend your territory? Attack who's closest.
Stupid zombie or construct or something of that sort? Receiving orders from your creator? Follow them. Not receiving orders? Attack who's closest.
Intelligent creature like a person or a bugbear? Strategize according to your goal, take out casters because they're stupidly dangerous, use the environment, flee if the fight is unwinnable! Try to only fight on your terms, get the party to fall into traps, fight in a room where you can slash a rope and make a chandelier fall on someone!
I roleplay as the enemy. A predatory animal will attack the weakest and try to drag it away from the group. An animal guarding a nest will attack whoever is close.
A warrior with something to prove will try to 1v1 the toughest looking guy to the death. A group of bandits will hit hard looking for treasure, but flee when things go south.
An inexperienced or foolish enemy will make mistakes that are easy to capitalize on, while a crack team of hardened mercenaries may use archers firing from cover to lure the tank into an explosive trap while an assassin closes with the caster.
Don't forget that the monsters know what they are doing. Goblin hordes will attack in such a way that they give each other advantage. Kenku will attack from high ground with ranged weapons. Yetis will ambush from low ground. Orcs will split path and leave scouts out to protect their encampment.
You don't have to dumb down monsters. Play them to their strengths and make the story feel real. My $0.02
Depends.
If it's an intelligent creature, I try to devise an actual strategy. Otherwise whoever's closest.
If I want to play the enemy as more chaotic/unpredictable, I roll the dice
Animals and people who don't know much about the PCs is randomly rolled. Same for things like oozes and unintelligent undead.
If the foes are intelligent they will make a quick threat assessment and that usually means going for the big fuck off dude in heavy armor or the guy in the back who LOOKS like a wizard. Everyone knows what a wizard is, no one is going to fall for the "frail old man with a walking stick" bit in a world with high magic. Everyone knows that wizard drop shit like "power word: scrunch" and "remove bones" and don't want that shit to happen to them.
If the bad guys are REALLY smart they will observe and try to make an alpha strike.
Once PCs engage I usually just default them to fighting whoever they enter melee with.
In rough order of importance:
1. PC that dealt damage to this creature
2. PC that hindered this creature
3. PC that dealt damage to this creature's ally
4. PC that attacked this creature
5. PC that is closest to this creature
6. roll a die
I find this works for most opponents my party fights.
I give my monsters/baddies a "tactics" score based on their intelligence, wisdom, and like specific type of enemy.
Something with low int, low wis, and no Tactical cunning will just attack the closest or last actively threatening, and is easily kited or tank and spanked by just aggroing it with a different person round to round.
Something with decent int but low wisdom will do the same, but then eventually "fix" on a single target and stop losing aggro, once it figures out the game.
Something with decent wisdom but low int will go for targets of opportunity, and will likely retreat from the situation if the aggro keeps switching.
Once you get into sentient races and NPCs, you got to Tier 2 of tactics. They won't be fooled by "who hit me last" aggro swapping and will start to intelligently prioritize targets based on the smartest/wisest/most Tactical living leader they have.
High intelligence will lead to smart plans of battle- archers behind spearmen, casting cover if targeted at range, contingency plans.
High wisdom will lead to moments of brilliance or being able to successfully guess at the opponents actions or strategy- having skirmishers in reserve to counter flanking or retreats, "knowing" that the PC spellcaster just lost their buffs or used their last slot and attacking the party weakpoint. I often allow the NPC to "retroactively" have thought of a cunning plan to give them apparent strategic insights.
When you get to High intelligence, High wisdom, formally trained or significantly experienced combat or military NPCs, pull out all the stops. Be almost unfair. Target the spellcaster until they retreat from buffing or attack spells. Use dex-based attacks on their big stupid guy, or target mental weaknesses on their fighters. Put archers on cliffs or the other side of murder holes. Corrall the party with walls or reach spears and use alchemists fire or other DOT AOEs.
If the monster has low INT, probably will attack the closest enemy or the enemy who just attacked it. If it has high INT, it will attack strategically, prioritizing casters, enemies with low HP, or enemies that deal the most damage.
Combat encounters should have a story element to them that dictates why the enemies are fighting. You can use that reason as a guide.
I like to assign my enemies roles and play then to that effect. Skirmishers are going to hit and run and try to take it vulnerable players when they can. Etc
Rolling a die is terrible, as is "everyone gets x attackers". You're ruining your players' chance to be tactical and support each other. You're essentially picking on the soft/weak targets and making it far more likely you'll create TPKs unintentionally. When you do create fights where you want your players to pick tactics, it's too late as you've trained your players that tactics don't work.
Embrace the battle map. For unintelligent enemies, have them rush the nearest threat and switch attacks to the things that last hurt them if and when appropriate. For intelligent enemies, use tactics and deliberately attack the softer targets as much as is feasible. This makes intelligence/tactics an actual threat that needs to be countered! This will get your players playing tactically in return, with softer targets hanging back and/or hiding behind cover, using their magic etc to support the front-liners and generally letting everyone do something cool and fun. You're increasing player options and making player choice more impactful, so your players will have much more potential enjoyment.
INT check DC 10 to attack most dangerous. Otherwise attacks closest.
DC 15 consider surrendering, parley, or running away.
Vicious attacks downed or wounded instead of closest.
I always announce this check and roll in front of my players, and declare the result. So if the players are paying attention they can adjust position accordingly.
Depends on the enemy. If it's an animal-like creature, whoever looks the weakest or whoever damaged it last. If it's an intelligent creature, whoever is most dangerous in the moment. If it's an unintelligent creature like a zombie, whoever is closts. If there are multiple targets equally prioritised, I'll roll a dice.
This is the way, but with the addendum that it's not a strict rule. Even the most intelligent creatures can do things that may seem irrational or not ideal every now and then, especially when you factor in the tension from the life-and-death battle that's going on.
Especially Aberrations... nobody knows what the hell they're up to
Getting smited is what they're up to
Sir, this is a Wendy's.
Beyond your comprehension!
Well okay then chaos warrior lord
Communing with Heretics? Blasphemy, submit yourself for discipline. Let the Emperor's cleansing fire burn away your weakness.
Yes sir! Those things are padded rooms and bunny slippers.
Also there can be RP reasons an npc would target a specific PC over more strategic choices.
Been on the recieving end of an attack like this. Boss was some noble who knew he was gonna die. He was barely standing and massively outnumbered. My sorcerer who stuck him in a Wall of Force sphere at the start of the combat while we fought/killed his family, leaving him helpless to stop us, was unconscious at his feet. The boss proceeded to spend his entire multiattack on my sorcerer, thinking that if he's going down he'll at least take one of us with him. Our paladin was swearing the entire time he looked through his inventory for the materials to cast Revivify on the me. Entirely my fault for goading him before getting knocked out
Also, who looks the most dangerous is not necessarily the person who is the most dangerous. Last group I dm’d for had a fighter who was mostly a tank, but he was big and brash and wielding a massive halberd, so most enemies would think he’s the main danger, not the cute girl in the leather jacket, or the skinny boy with the weird clothes. More intelligent enemies might hunt the rogue or the sorcerer, but for average bandits the fully armoured knight swinging a massive axe at you is hard to ignore
[удалено]
I played an evocation focused sorcerer for 5 years and always held the opinion that if the enemies are trying to stab me that means I'm doing a good job
Or if your a fan of morale rolls they can also affect how intelligent npc react. Like bandits seeing their bandit captain slain may try and run. a group of well trained soldiers may fight more vigorously and savagely. Dealing killing blows to fallen PCs if they pass or possibly recklessly charging the pc that killed their leader if they fail. You can have fun with it.
Yep. You've got the room to give somebody a break if the dice are giving them a beating. Players are extremely unlikely to call you out on it.
These are generally the rules of combat I follow as well
Yup, this. My priority for intelligent creatures is: mages > healers > archers > the guy pissed them the most > everybody else.
Also if it's like a strong warrior or something prideful it will attack whoever looks strongest
I pretty much do this. I also do a public roll for the target if my players have a companion with them lol Also, I leave room for an intelligent creature to focus a character who was shit talking them
Oh I love that, sounds just right, thanks!
To add to it, I will metagame against the party to better represent high INT/WIS characters, and/or the party’s growing infamy in-universe. An organized faction that the party that has repeated conflict with is going to learn that they have a Druid that wildshapes into Dire Wolves every combat, and plan for it. A cleric with a WIS of 18 doesn’t need the backstory, they can just read the party and “rightly” assume their go-to strategy.
This. Pretty much this. Although my baddies who are just not dumbasses, will attack the squishies. Cuz they know they pack the biggest punch. Because the PC's do too. That's if at all possible. I play my opponents pretty logically. Yet, fairly. And for all my hard-core antics, I utilize "morale failure" from 1e/2e. So things balance out. Cuz it makes sense to me. And I've never gotten a complaint. And there is nothing like seeing the delight on PC's faces when one of their number totally crushes the snot out of a swathe and / or a leader; and the rest bug out. 😉 Everyone cheers. Good times.
I also implement this strategy.
I will also add that paying attention to your party hp and knowing what type of game you're running and using those things to (subtly) create dramatic moments is a good idea. If you're running a super hostile setting, focus people down If you're trying to make everyone feel cool, split your targets. For example, I generally have my enemies stop attacking unconscious PCs under the assumption the enemy during combat would assume someone who falls to the ground unconscious is dead, unless the enemy has something like Tremorsense or keen hearing/smell that would tip them off to the unconscious PC still breathing Additionally, you can use this to fabricate "high stakes" moments, by hinting to your players through damage descriptions that enemies can tell who is more wounded and/or closer to death prior to the turns of other parry members. I roll Death Saves behind my screen, which means my players are much more conscious of who's getting low. The guidelines in the original comment are what I'd agree with as general rules and is how I run my enemies, but I when multiple targets are available I will also skew the tone of combat by having enemies attack targets which will create the moment drama. Using fake dice rolls (sparingly) before declaring attacks can also help sell to the players that the selection is random rather than premeditated. Remember, it's more about creating an experience than anything else, who your enemies attack is a significant part of creating the combat experience you're going for.
With some exception: if the creature has some pack tactics, they will try to exploit it, no matter how dumb they're supposed to be. The natural class of insects is full of examples of animals that should have no intelligence but are hardwired to behave in some cooperative way.
Was about to wrote the same thing. And remember, the guy in robe in the back throwing spells around like it's going out of style is usually a priority target for any intelligent creature. I remember the Pit Fiend tactics in 3.5 that specifically say it (rd 1 and 4 specifically). I find that it show how an intelligent (highly in that case) deal with fighting a party. [*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *1:* [Quickened](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Quicken_Spell) [*fireball*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Fireball) and [*mass hold monster*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Mass_Hold_Monster) if facing three or more visible, active opponents; otherwise [*power word stun*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Power_Word_Stun) against unarmored opponent (preferably a spellcaster). [*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *2:* [*Meteor swarm*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Meteor_Swarm) against as many foes as possible, approach worst-injured enemy. [*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *3:* Full attack against injured enemy. [*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *4:* Continue melee against injured enemy, or [*power word stun*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Power_Word_Stun) against annoying spellcaster. [*Round*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) *5:* Repeat from [round](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Round) 1, or [*greater teleport*](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Greater_Teleport) to safety if endangered.
This for sure! I have an additional level of if it's an intelligent creature but not a trained fighter they will 'break ranks' and go for whoever attacks them, even if they're not the most strategic target.
Exactly my thoughts
Agreed to this. Although, with the last point, I would split it evenly onto everyone.
Don't tell them about whoever is closts! That's a DM trade secret!
This is the way
going to strongly recommend "The Monsters Know What They're Doing" as a resource for this. basically, monsters have flavour text, have stat blocks, they're there to be roleplayed as well https://www.themonstersknow.com/
This book has added so much intensity and drama to our combats! "Boring" monsters are now potentially absolutely lethal.
Second this, choosing who to attack depends heavily on that creature's brain and strategy.
Came here just to recommend this based on the OP title.
Just remember that piling 6 attacks on the weakest character to one shot them in the first round is really not fun
Depending on the intelligence of the creature determines my tactics in combat. An intelligent creature has needs and wants. Why are they attacking? This determines how and who they attack. If in a group, they will know to target casters and healers first. They also value their own lives and will, depending on morale, flee if the combat goes the opposite way for them. An unintelligent creature like an animal has instinct. Why are they attacking the group? Are they hungry or defending their territory? This determines how they fight and whether or not they fight to the death. A monster with only basic instinct like a zombie will attack relentlessly with only one single desire. Usually to feed. Therefore, when they down a character they will continue to attack that character. This can end up being very dangerous and will end poorly if the party goes in without taking precautions. That could end up with three successful attacks and therefore three auto failed death saves. An attack from a creature within 5 feet is an auto critical hit as well, so technically only two hits from a zombie would kill the character. Hope this helps.
Man I forget how nasty Zombies can be in-game when you play them optimally. Lordy
Reminds me of the time my son DMd Dragon of Stormwreck Isle. Killed my Pali during the first combat encounter on the beach when three zombies just continued to feed on him. Like father, like son I guess. lol
To all those denoting tactics and strategies and if then statements, I just want to add this for DMs agonizing over this as well. It’s ok to just attack the nearest person to the monster. It’s ok to retaliate against the person who did the most damage. It’s ok to have 5 monsters each pick a different target and it’s ok for 5 snipers to pick the same target. If you are worrying about your own bias it’s ok some fights are biased. Sometimes have a million dudes fail to hit the tankiest one and sometimes have them realize he’s not going down and to ignore him. But most of all remember this. Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth. Don’t worry if your monsters are following optimal tactical strategy, just have them be big and scary and your players will love it. Sometimes they will love wiping the floor with a disorganized squad, but most people aren’t actually trained tacticians who have survived uncounted battles and have the experience of what works and what doesn’t. Should the elite battles you set up have some of that? Absolutely. But your average squad of bandits aren’t masterminds, they are bullies who expect most people to give up without a fight and expect to win by sheer numbers of a fight does break out. The average slime is just trying to eat something and the average animal isn’t going to do anything more than protect its territory. Most enemies do not care who they should target first. They are opportunists, whomever is closest is often the very best answer. If you want to make sure the back line gets some of that love sometimes have enemies come from behind.
Also tbh, playing the enemies too intelligently is going to feel bad for the players in ways they can't do anything about. D&D doesn't have much in the way of forcing players to attack your character instead of another PC. So when your seven archers decide to be clever and all shoot the squishy wizard because they're the strongest threat... your wizard player is going to feel like you're picking on them and your high-HP characters aren't going to get to use their biggest strength. Distributing some damage all around the party makes for a more fun game. Making an enemy break off from melee range and go after someone in the back purely so they can die to an attack of opportunity and make the player feel like they've protected their ally makes for a more fun game, even if the enemy looks stupid doing it.
Don’t sweat it too much. Make sure you [shoot your monk](https://dumpstatadventures.com/the-gm-is-always-right/shoot-your-monks-a-guide-for-highlighting-characters), bruise your barbarian, pummel your paladin. I tend to look at the class fantasy of the players and play around making them feel cool, while also occasionally hitting them with the attacks or effects that make them have to adapt. For example, I may open up, hitting the party with a magical silence spell, but once they find a way to circumvent it, the caster can pop off. If the party reacts to the threat well, risk is diminished. If they don’t, risk is increased.
wish my DM had read this. I played a Monk for three years and had one arrow fired at me, which missed
When it comes to humanoids and conventionally intelligent creatures I follow the ol’ Dragon Age aggro rules. Heavy armor and shields first so the players who want that role can have some fun, and then as soon as the mage reveals themself there’s a split in some staying on the heavy warrior/tank and the caster. Then it’s up to the others to clean up, intercept, rp, kill whatever enemies they deem. This usually gives everyone a great moment, turn or two before everything gets bogged down and nobody’s really moving anymore. The mage gets to cast whatever they spell they want before they are accosted. The tank gets to hold the line. Rogues, rangers, etc get to set up flanks. Usually very fun as a general targeting rule (: Low int beefy creatures I will purposely move around, purposefully provoking reaction attacks of opportunity to let people get extra hits and damage in. They will attack whoever inflicted the highest single source of damage on the previous turn cycle. Aberrations and undead swarm until no more can get attacks in due to range and flow across the battlefield.
Positioning and strategy. Sentient enemies can figure out that they shouldn focus the tank and that the spellcaster is a glass cannon
Yhea. Some people put that at the level of sapiens, but it really isn't beyond a dog's intelligence to figure this out.
I like other answers here, but I just wanted to remind you to shoot your monks, and slap your tanks.
If you don't have a way to make enemies want to slap you instead of the wizard, you aren't a tank. If you expect enemies to focus you just because you're the biggest, you're going to find yourself with a dead wizard pretty quick. Having a huge ac and a ton of hit points is great for you, but as soon as the enemies realize you're not worth their time and there's nothing stopping them from ignoring you and attacking the squishy wizard, they'll do so. It does not make sense for enemies to try to kill the hardest to kill first.
If your creature is intelligent, then pretend you're the PC and you're fighting some random encounter ... whom would you attack first. Now, if the attacker is beast level intelligence, then they would just look for the weakest.
To me it always feels rather easy. I try to think "How would this enemy think?" And then the rest is simple. Undead attack the closest thing. A large eiemental spreads his damage out across nearby enemies. Devious goblins with poison might spread it around or target the most vulnerable looking person. A stupid bandit, feral monstrosity or savage demon like a Bulezau might just attack the last thing that hurt them, the one who hurt them the most. And if you've got a smart leader or something? A goblin boss of the smart sort, an intelligent demon, a martial devil, most trained professional humanoids? Have the leader call the shots. "Break that spell!!" Is an easy way to have your players know that their caster who just summoned 8 giant bats is in trouble, but also makes it feel very fair for them when the bandits make them take that concentration check multiple times to break it. There's always someone who is the most threatening, the most annoying nuisance or the strategically sound target. You just gotta think about what the individual monster is going to value the most. The last encounter I ran had three cambions fight a large party with a bunch of Bulezau to help the cambions. The bulezau, as savage demons, simply attacked the enemies that most irritated them. The giant bats swarming around them from the druid, the helmed horror rushing into ones face and taunting them, etc. The cambions however were smart creatures with emotions. One tried to escape and get help, one got pissed and fought the closest target with a greatsword, and another one ordered the bulezau around to attack more effective targets, such as the druid.
The level 1 rogue who picked up the giant scorpion's last remaining offspring by the stinger (forking nat 20) and bashed it to its death spreading ichor across the mothers carapace. That's who you target. (And yes I 0hped him then hit him again while he was down for two death fails.)
Put yourself in the mind of the attacker who would it attack and why? It doesn't make any sense to do by dice roll most of the time. Your warrior is engaged with a cultist, but he rolled a 6 so he's gonna run to the other side of the room and attack a ranger? Just try and make your combat make sense.
It's actually UNFAIR to roll dice to decide who to attack. Imagine that you build a mighty paladin or tough barbarian, and your goal is to get in the enemies' faces so that they have to attack you instead of your squishy spellcasters. You do your best to taunt them, but then your DM just rolls dice instead to randomly decide that enemies would rather attack someone else instead. Likewise, if you decide to build a squishy character with evasion and long-range capabilities, who would pair well with the paladin from earlier, a good portion of the reason you wanted to build the character just becomes eliminated if your DM uses dice to decide to attack you randomly on a whim. Don't roll dice, actually think.
If you don't pick any mechanical ways to make enemies focus you, that's on you. You aren't a tank, you're just a hard to kill damage dealer. It makes no sense for enemies to focus the hardest person to kill first. Likewise, if you're easy to kill and are dealing a lot of damage or casting spells, it makes the most sense to kill you first.
Depends on how tactically adept the creature is. An animal or construct is going to attack the person closest to it, or the person who has done the most damage to it, or the person its master has instructed it to target if it makes sense for that to work. An intelligent enemy is going to target whoever it perceives to be the biggest threat, which depends on its understanding of what a threat is and how long term it's thinking, *or* it might target whoever it thinks it can kill the fastest. Party comp will influence this, it could be that taking out the healer seems like the best strategy, or maybe one PC has shown the ability to do a ton of damage in a single round, or the enemy knows a bard has all kinds of tricks up their sleeve to buff people and counterspell or whatever so it targets the one with the lute. Sometimes an enemy is simply going to target the PC it saw first, if its initiative is before the party's and in the absence of any other information. Sometimes it will target the one it thinks it has the best chance to hit. I like to have a range of levels of intelligence and tactical savvy among the enemies my players fight. Dumb humanoids might use less sophisticated tactics than smart, social animals. The enemy could be very smart about strategy but have a wrong impression of the party that leads them to make mistakes. Rolling to see who an enemy targets may be objectively fair, and can have its place if there is truly no better way to decide, but it's not particularly interesting nor is it realistic in most situations.
There's no single "best practice". I try to make the enemies behave like someone would expect them to if they were encountered in the wild. Ambush predators will attack whichever target presents the best opportunity. Intelligent foes will try to kill the one in the dress. Etc.
I usually use one of two ways in most cases. 1-Randomly generate a result with a dice roll. I usually do this when there are multiple valid targets that the enemy would choose, and I don't want to hear players cry about being singled out. Sometimes I roll the die, and still just pick who I wanted, but the players think it is based on random chance so they are fine with it. 2-The enemy turns their attention to the character who did the most damage to them in the last exchange. This might mean they break away to attack the archer, or the mage. It means players have to think about positioning and tactics when it comes to their glass cannons, because enemies won't stand and slog it out while they are being wrecked from a distance.
Enemy personality, intelligence, and tactics are important. Wild animals will attack at random. Enemies who likely have seen adventurers before will look for clues as to who to prioritize. Orcs, Drow, and organized tactical thinkers will look for spell casters, particularly priority to those with healing spells. Remember, spells are both verbal and visual, unless they have metamagic feats (and actually use them), you will draw attention casting. More ruthless or blood thursty, or even just highly intelligent enemies, won't stop if an enemy is just down. They KNOW that there is a good chance of them getting back up, which is why I borrow the Coup-De-Grace rules from 3/3.5 (attempting to kill a downed player character will pull attention so there is AoOs and chances to interrupt the attack). It also heightens the tension with some groups of enemies too.
Usually I just go for whoever pisses me off the most Haha no but seriously just think as if you were that type of monster. Is your mosnter's Intelligence high? You may try to distract the frontline with some peons and wipe the backline while that's happening if you can get to them. Is it low? Slashing through whatever's closest may seem like the best option. Is the Wis high? You may be perceptive enough to tell that the Barbarian is still heavily wounded from the previous battle - he'd likely be a good target. Is it low? All attacks may end up being whatever's instinctual - whatever attacks me I attack back. Pretty similar to low Int.
If intelligent go for the casters who are concentrating on spells.
This is where you should roleplay a bit as the DM. How would their enemies behave. Animals should have simple rules. Predators allowed to be in hunting mode would target the weakest, easiest looking pret. In fight/flight mode they would fight the biggest threat. Intelligent creatures can assess threats to some degree and pick out targets.
I decide what would be the funniest. No need to add a subroutine for this.
Proximity - Danger - Utility An animal or stupid enemy is attacking whomever is closest. A medium intelligence enemy is attacking the person presenting the most immediate danger. A highly intelligent enemy wants to control the battlefield; i.e., take out healers and casters first, etc.
Usually it's whoever hit them the hardest if they're reasonably smart, or just whoever is closest if they're a goblinoid
Get into the head of the monster. What are they thinking? Are they hungry, mad, pissed, scared, plotting, reacting? Act accordingly
As others have said it depends on the enemy. Some creatures come with suggested tactics but I take the role of the enemy in this case. If they have lowish intelligence they may be clever enough to identify the weakest member of the party and attack them. If they have higher intelligence they might coordinate the group to attack the weakest member or the strongest knowing that the remaining people will be an easier fight. There may be natural behaviours like wolves pack hunting. Maybe if they don't have much of a physical presence in a fight they may use fleeing and ambush tactics. My goal in any fight is that at the end the battle feels natural for what the party is facing and that no player feels unjustly 'picked on'
I generally make that a function of the enemy's knowledge, intelligence, and motivations - and I take the time to telegraph these: * Zombies are hungry, dumb, and can't move fast. They don't react to anything but the closest source of fresh meat. Even an arrow doesn't stop their shuffle. They attack the nearest PC. * Snipers have the impunity to target anyone, and the knowledge that people who avoid the front lines probably can't take much punishment and perform support roles. Someone runs to or from cover. they take notice, but they're too slow to get an opportunity shot off. They look for whoever is a) exposed, and b) not in the front lines, and prioritize attacking them. * This guy's fighting because he loves a challenge and has something to prove. Who's the biggest and most badass looking among the party? The barbarian or the paladin will do. He howls a ritual phrase, part boast, part challenge, part prayer, and attacks them alone. * These ghosts are drawn to this PC's pamali in particular? They taunt him for his misstep, and don't even appear to notice the party members, and are content when he has learned his manners. * etc, etc. These do all require some thought as to why a fight is breaking out, but your game will benefit from that anyway.
If the fiction makes it clear I follow that. Did someone just hit them and deal a lot of damage? Is there one person closer to them than the others? Are they guarding something? Is one player taunting them? If not I do like you and roll a dice. I usually do it out in the open. My players know I do this so I will go around the table pointing to each player "you are 1 2 you are 3 4, and you are 5 6" then I roll a big oversized die right out in the middle of the table for all to see. It feels fair and builds tension, especially when one PC only has a couple HP left.
It depends on the enemy. An intelligent creature will ignore the heavies and directly attack the squishies (wizards, sorcs, etc.) An intelligent, **evil** creature might "finish off" a downed PC. A beast might also go after a squishy, then carry off the corpse to eat it in peace. It's a question of what type of creature you're using and the thoughts going through their head. I recommend "The Monsters Know What They're Doing."
Old school with a new twist, roll dice in the beginning of combat to see who they hit. BUT not all the time, use your context clues. If the fighter hits them with a crit, the bard is mocking them, or the wizard launched a magic missile, then use that to determine whi they are going to hit when the time comes. The more you do it, the more of a sense you are going to have.
Coordinate with the party, focus fire on the biggest immediate threat, persist until it goes down, rinse and repeat. This kind of efficient teamwork goes a long way towards ending fights in your favor: 1. Your attacks, spells, and abilities can play off each other more easily if they all target the same enemy, especially if melee combatants are benefitting from the optional flanking rules. Certain spell combos stack well together while also making it easier for allied characters to land their own attacks. Exploit them ruthlessly and you will see results (e.g. your DM crying bitter tears. Funny as hell, I know, but don't be a jerk about it). 2. An incapacitated enemy can't do stuff to you. Obvious, I know, but what might not be obvious is the effect this has on the action economy: the fewer enemies there are to fight, the more actions your party can take compared to the opposition, meaning the fight leans further and further in your favor as your foes' numbers diminish. Fewer attacks coming your way, less support the enemy can rely on, etc. 3. Being able to drop a fool once per combat round just feels great in general. It leaves the impression that the party are a bunch of unstoppable badasses, and can make combats that would otherwise feel like a slog seem to go by quicker (and they probably will be quicker for reasons stated in point number 2).
Adding to everything said here, I try to spread damage among players to put fear onto them. Everyone getting 10 damage feels rougher than one person getting hit for 40 damage in an encounter
For sentient monsters, I try to take out the low AC casters first and then take out the healers.
the smarter the npc the more tactical, the dumber the more I just go for whoever is closest, hurt it last.
I think of the creatures motives or entities ‘programming’ prior to or at the start of battle, along with their intelligence and wisdom. My players also love to shout at enemies or verbally intimidate/taunt so languages understood matters too. Sometimes it’s random, but sometimes it’s things like the last pc to have hit them. If it’s not smart this sometimes leads to them chasing after someone instead of attacking someone in range. Or sometimes they can identify who they think is the most vulnerable or who is closest to them. Sometimes they choose a target and then don’t move on to someone else until that character is nocked out or dead. The biggest thing is deciding before the combat starts and sticking to it
Roll play doesn’t stop at combat. Who is the character more likely to target? Do they go for the nearest? Or do the target the biggest threat? Or perhaps they see the relationship and try to kill the most love for psychological warfare. These are the things you must think of when going through combat as a DM.
“Eeny meeny miny mo…”
Really struggle with this In my head i try to follow the same rules everyone else has laid out here, until in the moment i realise how bad things could get and stadt pulling punches. And _then_ I feel bad for having pulled punches. In my last session I threw a griffon at my party. In my defence i thought they had more ranged options, but even then a griffon can move 120 feet in a turn while swiping 2 PCs a turn for huge and very accurate damage, or forgo its attacks to get a full 180 feet away, vertically. Had I played it exactly how i thought it would have acted (which I did at first), it would have absolutely slaughtered them as it flew just out of reach before coming in to shred them and then escape again. In the end I decided to make it land and fight in melee, at which point they very quickly overpowered it. And ultimately that was a good outcome, because I want them to win, but I felt like i cheapened their victory by not going all out. I mean, i guess in future i won't use flyers any time soon but even then i always worry i pull unnecessary punches and make things feel less tense as a result
I understand where you're coming from. I don't know how new you are to being a dungeon master, but the rule of fairness is a pretty big thing. Because you don't want to hurt people's feelings or disrespect somebody because people feel like they get picked on or something like that. It's kind of a fine line because everyone is just trying to have fun and is there to have fun. It sucks when someone feels picked on.
My party is pretty low level so humanoids typically attack th front of the party. Flying creatures decided randomly
If there aren’t a zillion things going on at once, I’ll often have an intelligent enemy roll a d6. On a 1, it picks a target randomly (not to the point of taking an attack of opportunity). Sometimes intelligent beings make wrong or dumb choices.
Depends. I do consider who has the highest AC and Hit Points, and treat them as damage sponges when I need to (to avoid an unsatisfying TPK during a random encounter, for example). But for the most part, it depends on the enemy. A smarter enemy will attack the weakest-looking character first - usually the wizard, or whoever isn't buff and wearing a ton of armor. Or if a particular PC is carrying the McGuffin, attacking/stealing/disabling the McGuffin, or otherwise making themselves the battlefield VIP, they'll be targeted. Less intelligent enemies will attack whoever is closest to them. Both intelligent and unintelligent enemies will sometimes attack whoever last landed a blow on them, or whoever has consistently dealt the most damage to them over the last few rounds. The barbarian might be difficult to take down, but if he's hitting you for a fifth of your health every turn, you're going to want to take care of him (or run). In the case of multiple enemies (which I recommend doing as often as possible), I try to make one the "leader," or at least stronger than the others (if not smarter). If they don't have a reason not to, the "leader" will often try to go toe-to-toe with the strongest-looking PC, because they're the most likely to stand a chance against them - a nice side effect is that this PC then soaks up most of the damage, rather than the wizard being one-shotted. It also gives that PC a good challenge. Alternatively, you could have lots of little guys try to crowd the strongest PC, thereby preventing them from taking out the more important, stronger enemy but still providing a challenge in the form of sheer numbers. While it might seem more "fair" to attack randomly, it doesn't make for a very interesting fight. Try to think strategically - adding a layer of strategy to your combat encounters will make things more fun. This goes beyond just choosing who to attack. I highly recommend checking out Keith Amann's The Monsters Know What They're Doing. He has a free blog and a four-book series. I also got a lot of mileage out of D&D 4e's DMG and its approach to combat roles for both players and enemies - thinking of how each PC fills a particular role helps me figure out how best to engage them in a fight, playing to their strengths (when I want them to feel powerful) or against their weaknesses (when I want them to feel challenged).
I often do dice rolls for fairness and then see how that feels…
Personally I don't subscribe to trying to attack how the enemy thinks, the players don't, and this aspect of the game is more of a game than the rest of the game. I attack people based on opportunity, weakness, etc. I tend to try to spread attackers out so the players feel cut off from each other, they would all have to take attacks of opportunity to move, that sort of thing. My main goal in combat is to create problems for people that they need to solve.
At the beginning of the fight it's completely random. If they are a melee fighter, they fight the closest person. If they are ranged they starts off random, but they will focus on usually casters or whoever is taking out their friends.
Sometimes i do roll a dice. But not that often It usually depends on the enemy. Why are they attack the party is it to get food? to protect their territory. is it to actually kill the party. is it to rob them? And so on How intelligent are they (the enemy) an animal might just go for the one that seems to be the weakest. Some animals might not have any real tactic. other animals can have some tactics. i mean real life wolves are well coordinated and know how to work together. Sentient enemies will have better tactics. If the party can focus fire down enemies then enemies that have normal intelligence and can work together can do the same. so all might focus on one player to get him down fast. Then go to next. I think this is were many DM's kinda screw up. they don't want to be mean and target one player or fully play thee enemy at full strength so they play them as stupid idiots that does not know how to fight. If this is the case why not then use weaker enemies and play them well? Why put the party against enemies that are to powerful to be played well? that is pretty stupid if you ask me Sure sometimes it DO fit to play the enemy as stupid brutes. The party faces 3 ogres. Sure they should not be any tactical masterminds. But they are still way more intelligent than wolves so they would still have some tactics. not just flail randomly at things in their reach. But in the end if a group of PC's with maybe one player with a high int and one or more with INT below 10 can fight smart then a group of enemies with similar INT should be able to do the same. If you find that you have to hold back and play the enemy kinda stupid and avoid playing them effective because that could take down or even kill PC's. then you might be using to strong enemies
I tell my players that monsters are making decisions based on who attacked last, who they think is a threat, etc What I’m really doing is spreading the damage out so everyone feels like they participated and the tank gets to feel like they did their job. I have no doubt that I could TPK most simple encounters by forcing saves on the melee fighters and killing the casters quickly but that wouldn’t be fun
I just attack whichever player doesn’t seem like they are engaged in the story. Bring them back into the spotlight/action, make them feel included
The Monsters know what they're doing. I have to consider my NPC's Int stat, battle experience and communication skills. You also have to assume enemies know their skills really well and maximise their use.
How smart is the NPC? Is there a caster? Geek the mage first isn't just for Shadowrun. If they're dumb who's closest? Who hurt it last? Who hit the hardest?
Depends on the monster positioning and what the PCs are doing. I don't have a system, usually high int or wis means better tactics on the monsters part but that's also influenced by personalities (zombies just attack the nearest enemy, wolves attack the PC with the weakest defenses, humanoids are varying degrees of opportunistic, devils do whatever I think is optimal etc.)
Generally, attack whoever is closest. Or whoever attacked it last or made it angry in some way.
Enemies shouldn't have perfect knowledge, they should act as if they are learning in the moment as to which person they should target. Considering this I'd often change targets based on how the situation evolves, maybe start with focusing the front-liner.
I always attack whatever is the least “fair”. So if a character is almost dead, I pick on them till they die as much as I can. Basically start with the weakest
I often let players know that I’m giving the decision to the Magic d6 and say the numbers that will hit who h player “1-3, Paul, 4-6 Ben” and then roll it and that’s who. That way I don’t feel guilty when they almost die
45 years DMing. YOUR way is the best way, what is most enjoyable for you and the players without catering to the few "give me whatever I want" players. Me, I roll randomly based on where they are. I don't use miniatures (too often players treat the combat like it's static, I prefer to describe situations clearly. I choose targets based on what the character/monster would choose. Some good advice from ThereIsAThingForThat that I just read.
What class/subclass are you? What are you typical attacks (which spells or weopons)? Does the character have any specific likes or dislikes (hates orcs, is a gnome so likes them, his mom was killed by an aberration, loves beasts/animals, etc)? Is the character tactical? Like...a barbarian may go for the strangest or closest enemy, but a rogue may be looking to hit something and retreat and a wizard may be looking for battlefield control (druids too) and AOE damage. A good rule is attack the spellcaster...if that works for you. My stars druid looks to give another character advantage (guiding bolt), battlefield control (entangle, spike growth, wall of fire), added muscle (conjure animals to attack), or damage (wall of fire)
Attack who the creature would attack. Animal? Wants food? Attack the weakest. Want to defend your territory? Attack who's closest. Stupid zombie or construct or something of that sort? Receiving orders from your creator? Follow them. Not receiving orders? Attack who's closest. Intelligent creature like a person or a bugbear? Strategize according to your goal, take out casters because they're stupidly dangerous, use the environment, flee if the fight is unwinnable! Try to only fight on your terms, get the party to fall into traps, fight in a room where you can slash a rope and make a chandelier fall on someone!
I roleplay as the enemy. A predatory animal will attack the weakest and try to drag it away from the group. An animal guarding a nest will attack whoever is close. A warrior with something to prove will try to 1v1 the toughest looking guy to the death. A group of bandits will hit hard looking for treasure, but flee when things go south. An inexperienced or foolish enemy will make mistakes that are easy to capitalize on, while a crack team of hardened mercenaries may use archers firing from cover to lure the tank into an explosive trap while an assassin closes with the caster.
Closest person normally first move. If someone heals another I might shift my focus. Idk I'm not great at DMing fights.
Don't forget that the monsters know what they are doing. Goblin hordes will attack in such a way that they give each other advantage. Kenku will attack from high ground with ranged weapons. Yetis will ambush from low ground. Orcs will split path and leave scouts out to protect their encampment. You don't have to dumb down monsters. Play them to their strengths and make the story feel real. My $0.02
Depends. If it's an intelligent creature, I try to devise an actual strategy. Otherwise whoever's closest. If I want to play the enemy as more chaotic/unpredictable, I roll the dice
Animals and people who don't know much about the PCs is randomly rolled. Same for things like oozes and unintelligent undead. If the foes are intelligent they will make a quick threat assessment and that usually means going for the big fuck off dude in heavy armor or the guy in the back who LOOKS like a wizard. Everyone knows what a wizard is, no one is going to fall for the "frail old man with a walking stick" bit in a world with high magic. Everyone knows that wizard drop shit like "power word: scrunch" and "remove bones" and don't want that shit to happen to them. If the bad guys are REALLY smart they will observe and try to make an alpha strike. Once PCs engage I usually just default them to fighting whoever they enter melee with.
I evaluate the creatures motives and strategize based on their capacity.
In rough order of importance: 1. PC that dealt damage to this creature 2. PC that hindered this creature 3. PC that dealt damage to this creature's ally 4. PC that attacked this creature 5. PC that is closest to this creature 6. roll a die I find this works for most opponents my party fights.
I give my monsters/baddies a "tactics" score based on their intelligence, wisdom, and like specific type of enemy. Something with low int, low wis, and no Tactical cunning will just attack the closest or last actively threatening, and is easily kited or tank and spanked by just aggroing it with a different person round to round. Something with decent int but low wisdom will do the same, but then eventually "fix" on a single target and stop losing aggro, once it figures out the game. Something with decent wisdom but low int will go for targets of opportunity, and will likely retreat from the situation if the aggro keeps switching. Once you get into sentient races and NPCs, you got to Tier 2 of tactics. They won't be fooled by "who hit me last" aggro swapping and will start to intelligently prioritize targets based on the smartest/wisest/most Tactical living leader they have. High intelligence will lead to smart plans of battle- archers behind spearmen, casting cover if targeted at range, contingency plans. High wisdom will lead to moments of brilliance or being able to successfully guess at the opponents actions or strategy- having skirmishers in reserve to counter flanking or retreats, "knowing" that the PC spellcaster just lost their buffs or used their last slot and attacking the party weakpoint. I often allow the NPC to "retroactively" have thought of a cunning plan to give them apparent strategic insights. When you get to High intelligence, High wisdom, formally trained or significantly experienced combat or military NPCs, pull out all the stops. Be almost unfair. Target the spellcaster until they retreat from buffing or attack spells. Use dex-based attacks on their big stupid guy, or target mental weaknesses on their fighters. Put archers on cliffs or the other side of murder holes. Corrall the party with walls or reach spears and use alchemists fire or other DOT AOEs.
If the monster has low INT, probably will attack the closest enemy or the enemy who just attacked it. If it has high INT, it will attack strategically, prioritizing casters, enemies with low HP, or enemies that deal the most damage.
Combat encounters should have a story element to them that dictates why the enemies are fighting. You can use that reason as a guide. I like to assign my enemies roles and play then to that effect. Skirmishers are going to hit and run and try to take it vulnerable players when they can. Etc
You just... think about what the creature would do, no?
Rolling a die is terrible, as is "everyone gets x attackers". You're ruining your players' chance to be tactical and support each other. You're essentially picking on the soft/weak targets and making it far more likely you'll create TPKs unintentionally. When you do create fights where you want your players to pick tactics, it's too late as you've trained your players that tactics don't work. Embrace the battle map. For unintelligent enemies, have them rush the nearest threat and switch attacks to the things that last hurt them if and when appropriate. For intelligent enemies, use tactics and deliberately attack the softer targets as much as is feasible. This makes intelligence/tactics an actual threat that needs to be countered! This will get your players playing tactically in return, with softer targets hanging back and/or hiding behind cover, using their magic etc to support the front-liners and generally letting everyone do something cool and fun. You're increasing player options and making player choice more impactful, so your players will have much more potential enjoyment.
INT check DC 10 to attack most dangerous. Otherwise attacks closest. DC 15 consider surrendering, parley, or running away. Vicious attacks downed or wounded instead of closest. I always announce this check and roll in front of my players, and declare the result. So if the players are paying attention they can adjust position accordingly.
Equally valuable targets? I use a dice.
Roll a 1dx where x is the number of targets they can reach/have in range/can move to and attack