QuoteLuring archers around corners is abuse of the AI. Plain and simple.
Don't do it.
It is not the players fault that archers run in. If you want to take away the freedom to move behind cover when shot at, which is the natural thing to do, I'd like to hear some suggestions other than having to stand there and get feathered, or have to charge into an enemy horde and into whatever traps and spells they might have.
If we're not allowed to move behind something when shot at, what can we do?
Run back enough behind said cover that the archers won't get clotheslined as the come over the corner? *shrug*
-EDIT-
I had a longer post here regarding how fuzzy luring is rule wise and asked for clarification...
...then it hit me. I knew what was being talked about. If I am mistaken please correct me.
The AI Abuse technique in question:
Sometimes when you enter a room full of mobs, the archers agro you and the other mobs don't. When archers agro, you run back to the group, luring the archers away while the melee's stand behind. Obviously, the melee's would see the archers chasing the PC and should logically follow as well, but they don't.
Is that the abuse being discussed? I was confused when I first read the post, because I've used luring and choke point techniques in the past with DM's present and even got DM XP for using such tactics in large battles...
...so I was confused. That being said, if I am correct, isn't this an AI Bug? Is there some way to fix it?
Charge them. I've yet to see a single scripted or spiced situation where charging would have resulted in obscene traps and other dangers. Rarely anything worse than a few slowing traps.
There is nothing to do for the AI though, short of making the monsters immobile turrets.
I always used to charge in the old UD gnolls quest at the river pathway. It was fun, and I got to bitch about getting the best stuff.
Take the gnoll quest for example. It isn't logical to stand in an open field, surrounded by snarling dogs, and your party getting turned into pin cushions without using some sort of 'cover'.
I just don't think it should be... peak your head out abit around the corner, wait for the archers to target you, then move back. Thats abusing the AI. Running around, willing to charge - and fleeing if need be is abuse of tactics (however limited they are on NwN).
Then ranged enemies should be removed, because frontliners are going to be exploited by having to charge into being surrounded whenever something shoots at them.
And you're wrong about traps, there are plenty of quests that mix damage traps with ranged enemies. Having a scout won't work either, since by this rule the average scout is going to get occasionally spotted and shot at. He will then have to run in a straight line into the mass of enemies, or in a straight line away, being careful to not break the enemies' line of fire becaues that's an exploit.
I think this has room for internal discussion amongst the DM staff.
My personal opinion is that certain quest designs encourage some sort of luring, perhaps the biggest example is the duergar quest, and I think that needs to be solved from a quest design standpoint. For example, simply placing a barrier down on the bridge will stop the crossbowmen from racing around a corner and being made into mince.
Deliberate luring, like Meldread mentions, of course is not appropriate. However some amount of luring is going to happen no matter what. In an ideal situation the AI would act and respond organically. It falls on both sides of the DM/PC line to minimize this unintentional luring.
Remember that we're all story tellers here. What sort of story are you telling when you say that the intelligent monsters ran around the corner with their bows out and got ripped to pieces because they saw you looking at them funny?
QuoteRemember that we're all story tellers here. What sort of story are you telling when you say that the intelligent monsters ran around the corner with their bows out and got ripped to pieces because they saw you looking at them funny?
So... we get to be the dumb ones?
Edit: Sorry if I sounded abrasive, it was not the intent. While I do agree that luring as Meldred explained is obvious abuse, I don't think we have to go kill ourselves just because we're shot at.
SD, most people learn how to not fight in melee with bows. I am sorry you've not learned this skill. Maybe you can audition for DUERGAR CROSSBOWMEN?
Quote from: Gippy;149331SD, most people learn how to not fight in melee with bows. I am sorry you've not learned this skill. Maybe you can audition for DUERGAR CROSSBOWMEN?
To which I will propose the following:
I've seen archers switch to melee weapons once in combat, like the troglodytes fishermen. While it will not solve the issue of luring, it will solve the issue of using a bow in melee.
Another suggestion that may or may not work as I know little of the AI, use the guerilla orcs hunters whatchamacall it that fights and retreats constantly.
While I understand the AI has shortcomings, we don't have to go and die because of it.
A 'must charge' rule is simply silly. There are smart characters. Playing them dumb is bad play. Also, not all characters are brave. Even some frontliners are cowards or not dumb enough to just charge. Besides, there are AI mobs that use luring tactics. Why cannot PCs do it?
Man up and charge. If its the duergar quest being mentioned, waiting till the archers run ALL THE WAY over the bridge then AROUND the cave is just lame.
However, there are definitely some quests and DM quests etc. where a small amount of luring is going to happen regardless, and in these cases its fine. Just use common sense!
There are two situations in quests I can think of where charging the archers results in stepping on obscene traps. I've willingly charged into both rooms, and predictably, I died. Admittedly, I don't think I would have died in either of the cases if my party had charged with me, but they were attempting to hold a position that, despite being tactically sound from a real-life point of view, would result in luring.
The two traps I'm referring to are almost always metagamed on these quests (occasionally one of them is actually spotted, thus making avoidance not metagamey), but one is difficult or impossible to spot (I have never spotted it with any character of mine, so I'm not sure).
Also, charging archers is not nearly as bad a strategy as most people think. They cite examples of lone people charging and getting mowed down as proof that it's suicide, but I can tell you if your party charges in unison, the archers don't stand a chance.
Quote from: Caddies;149335Man up and charge.
Is this an OOC message to players, regardless the characters they play?
Quote from: OrchardOfMines;149337Also, charging archers is not nearly as bad a strategy as most people think. They cite examples of lone people charging and getting mowed down as proof that it's suicide, but I can tell you if your party charges in unison, the archers don't stand a chance.
True, though assuming there are only going to be archers there is kinda silly from an IC standpoint, and is rarely what happens anyway.
Personally, I have never been fond of charging anyway, and usually play characters with some brains who are likewise not fond.
Obviously I try to be IC, while avoiding that sort of abusive luring, but it is not always possible. Is it more important to play your character as they would play, or deliberately ignore your IC habits for the sake of AI?
I agree with Gippy. Change the level design to deal with the AI. Obviously good AI programming is hard to come by, so you just change the enemies or change the obstacles. Adding a barrier (like FleetingHeart did today as he rained down fiery.... tunnel... collapse?) works just fine. The -last- thing you do is attempt to force change upon the players.
The Progression goes like this, using Crystal Caves as an example:
Do the easiest thing: Throw down a few obstacles in the toolset on the bridge. This would force the players to move in, and would prevent the archers from rushing forward. The only downside is typically you might have them all gather at one obstacle point, making them open to AoE Magic Attacks. To prevent this, you do multiple obstacles that would block their path, if needed.
This would either have two main results: People would continue to go to the caves, and deal with the obstacle most likely by hitting from afar and having someone run up and destroy it. Alternatively, what could happens is a lot less people would come to the caves because they find the pelting of arrows to be more work than the loot is worth.
(The third option is to bring several evoking wizards along, have them prepare long range damage spells, completely empty their arsenal on the dark dwarves on the other side, then as that likely wouldn't be enough, leave the mines, and either camp outside the caves and recover their spells, or go to the camp above and recover their spells, and return to completely finish them off. From a strict reading of the current rules, such a "siege" upon such a well defended location is legal, unless I missed some rule about leaving and returning to Quest Locations, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)
If they continue to assault it, all is well, and things go on. If a lot less players go, then either the enemies need to be changed, the battlefield needs to be changed, the loot needs to be altered, or a combination of the aforementioned. If it can't be solved (Due to the changes needed to be too extreme, or a lack of builders), then the quest is simply removed, as it can't be successfully played without it being abused.
The players aren't the only ones who have to work around the limitations of the game engine, and should be the last to do such.
Apologies ahead of time if my post comes off as self-righteous or abrassive.
charging rules charge and you rule fight like a pussy and get shit on
Send somebody down in stealth or invis to pop up next to the archers and draw fire, then, while the others advance.
Or else pick somebody with some good AC and just stay about 10 steps behind them.
Alternatively, you could hire somebody with good damage reduction buffs like ghostly visage or stoneskin to take the lead.
And of course, there's nothing wrong with just returning fire. Give it as good as you get.
But I'm trying to wrap my mind around the idea that somebody would be so obvious and blatant as to lure the duergars from the area you're talking about, across the bridge, and around the corner before fighting them. It's not even subtle. It's boring.
Quote from: Gippy;149329I think this has room for internal discussion amongst the DM staff.
My personal opinion is that certain quest designs encourage some sort of luring, perhaps the biggest example is the duergar quest, and I think that needs to be solved from a quest design standpoint. For example, simply placing a barrier down on the bridge will stop the crossbowmen from racing around a corner and being made into mince.
Deliberate luring, like Meldread mentions, of course is not appropriate. However some amount of luring is going to happen no matter what. In an ideal situation the AI would act and respond organically. It falls on both sides of the DM/PC line to minimize this unintentional luring.
Remember that we're all story tellers here. What sort of story are you telling when you say that the intelligent monsters ran around the corner with their bows out and got ripped to pieces because they saw you looking at them funny?
This about sums it up. Don't blame bad design on the players. Also don't expect people to run into a horde of archers for no reason outside of making up for bad design. If the archers can run to you and attack then it's not exploiting or abuse, but whatever.
ScruffyMcSmirkalot-
If I'm not mistaken you shouldn't leave a quest area, rest, and then return. That's considered bad, a DM can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm nearly 100% sure that's considered bad. :p
Using the Duegar Quest as an example....
I agree 100% that it's AI exploitation if you run around the corner, lure the crossbow mobs at the end of the fight, and then run back around the corner. That is definitely AI exploitation, although those bastards have some ridiculous range.
I've been in a situation where stepping around the corner managed to lure one, while I ran back around the corner to ICly warn the rest of the group about the Duegar across the water... and as I'm talking to the others, BOOM one of them showed up right behind me. I wasn't expecting the mob to really run *THAT* far to get to me... so in this particular situation I'm going to have to say while it can totally be exploited, it's also a combination of area design that needs to be improved as well as stupid AI.
I don't think there should be a blanket rule where the group has to charge. There are just so many IC situations that can appear where charging doesn't make sense. There are also cases of accidental luring where you unintentionally gain agro of a room on a really squishy character and pull one or two mobs instead of the entire room. Does it really make sense in that situation, because of stupid AI, for a wizard to charge into the room with his staff? :p
I think the focus should be on the obviously exploitative, and I think in those situations when players do it – it is very clear. I'm going to go back to what Caddies said... it's about common sense on the part of both PC's and DM's.
I don't think players should have to compensate for dumb AI though. It's just all about common sense.
I would also suggest to have AI receive a conditional "don't chase" command. In most cases, especially in certain quests, the mobs are standing in such defensible positions, it makes no sense at all for them to chase anyone. They block progression, so getting through them is necessary, and chasing anyone causes them to lose their defensible position.
I think a lot can be done to improve AI and in general make quests more awesome. Example: The Duegar are standing in a very defensible position blocking entrance deeper into the mines. They KNOW anyone wanting to get deeper into the mines would require intruders to pass through them. So they don't give chase, but instead hold their position and fire off one liners.
"[The Duegar raises his crossbow and yells taunts at you in its dwarven tongue.]"
"[The Duegar raises his battleaxe and taunts you obscenely.]" Etc.
Have the situation where the NPC's are trying to lure the PC's into the room, forcing them into a sort of stand-off game of chicken. Toss in a wizard or something, and a summoning circle, where the wizard automatically summons one NPC each time their summoned creature dies... in which their summoned mob runs down the hallway to chase the PC's. Have their crossbowmen run up to a certain trigger point, fire off their crossbows, and when they are advanced upon, retreat back behind the barricade.
I'm not sure if AI can be that complex, but it certainly would be awesome. :p
Quote from: lovethesuit;149350Send somebody down in stealth or invis to pop up next to the archers and draw fire, then, while the others advance.
Or else pick somebody with some good AC and just stay about 10 steps behind them.
Alternatively, you could hire somebody with good damage reduction buffs like ghostly visage or stoneskin to take the lead.
And of course, there's nothing wrong with just returning fire. Give it as good as you get.
But I'm trying to wrap my mind around the idea that somebody would be so obvious and blatant as to lure the duergars from the area you're talking about, across the bridge, and around the corner before fighting them. It's not even subtle. It's boring.
That's how I always played the quest on Zhong. Improved Expertise, full plate, and shield gave him good AC. Get wizards and clerics to give him further buffs, and he'd just charge across the bridge, gain the agro of all the mobs, fall into improved expertise, and let the rest of the group clean them up one by one as he was surrounded. There needed to be more wizards there casting combust to combat that tactic.
Oh boy, I see the discussion about the Purple Mines always comes back. I sign under SD's semi-rude remark.
Why do -we- have to act stupid if most of the PC's have above 10 Int anyway, and charge a group of archers like morons?
If we're talking realism here, there will ALWAYS be something surreal with the AI or simply stupid, as it's called AI for a reason.
As for a possible solution to this trully horrid problem which raises so much debate, I see THREE of them:
1) Forementioned barricades.
2.) Giving the duergar crossbowmen the same AI script or wtfever it's called as the Spitting Oozes have - they stand in spot and never move.
3.) Give them the AI of the Guerillas as mentioned.
In fact, I see a fourth solution to this:
4.)Remove the fucking quest and the problem is solved.
Though, i thought that the intent behind this quest was to allow the PC's to resupply. Making it harder and harder and harder will surely not help that and IMHO result in the PC's getting exactly the same ammount of healing they burned to complete it. The loot was nerfed already. Not to mention that one has to TRAVEL all the way to the mine, and back from it, which without a mage and memorised invis, or chugging three-four invis pots for the way, results in quite an ammount of burned consumables, as most often, you get to run into the big cave bears ON the way. Very often INSIDE the QA as well, or the annoying UD dire spiders.
If there's a problem with the AI of the ranged monsters in general, use either solution number 2, or solution number 3. But then, really, if we want realism, then the sight range of the monsters should be at least quadruppled to represent the friends of the monsters fight in front, yelling, sounds of fighting/magic etc. Which in the end would result in PC's being unable to complete ANY of the SQ's due to simply overwhelming power of the whole quest mob, which if represented the real intelligence, would simply turn even the most powerful parties into mush. Has anyone of you counted how many orcs are there on the orc quest? How many orc shamans? They could simply team up in invis and fireball-gank the whole team in one go, without even sending thus hundred of warriors to fight. Same applies for gnolls. Duergar. Basically almost ANY of the quest in which you fight sentient creatures.
I myself the whole idea behind quest spice was to in fact bring the REALISM and CHALLENGE and uber FUN in facing a trully intelligent opponent(s).
But being ordered to charge like a bunch of morons at a group of archers, knowing/suspecting there's MORE than the archers, is pretty ... lame. Sorry for this.
,,,
...
Charge and take it like a man.
Isn't charging a group of Archers the smarter option?
It does amuse me that a crappy quest I built in less than 20 minutes because it sucked for PCs to not have a good way to replenish healing creates such controversy.
If I had toolset access I would fix the issue - barrier, changed AI, or even just sticking a melee weapon in inventory should do it.
As for the question yes you can be IC and duck behind cover if you are dying, just don't rely on luring tactics to crush unpossessed monsters.
In this case a few changes in the toolset should address the issue.
...
...
...
HOWLAND IS A WINRAR!
That response is totally full of WIN and LULZ >,>
Personally I feel if you can logically justify your PC's IC action's whats to worry about. If you do something that a DM questions, explain your actions and either it's ok or not. If you're meta-gaming then you know you are is how I feel about it.
Sometimes due to game mechanics you simply can't help but take advantage of AI and I think most DM's would understand. If they dont understand and spank you for it and it pisses ya off, you can always rage quit ;) (thats what I do, then come back.)
Turning back is always an option.
Its quite simple really, just use common sense when fighting archers.
Theres going to be a time when a DM will be watching you and we can easily spot the differences between accidental and intentional luring.
TBH Howland is a little played out. The gimmick has lost its edge. I think we should change the character so that it has more wacky catchphrases, something we can get the kids at home saying. See sir, I'm a traditionalist. I believe in word of mouth advertising. Howland's got it, but he hasn't quite got it, do you know what I'm sayin'?
TBH I think there should be allowance for some form of luring. All the quests on this server are difficult and can definatly be unforgiving to new comers. Running into the massive room on the Brood Hive quest would be a prime example of this >_>
Some brutally uncaring gentleman once said "it's a steep learning curve."
Personally, I don't believe you need to be wtf good to successfully defeat some of the more difficult quests. Despite my persona, I'm actually quite shit at mechanics. I've defeated the Quest in Question (QIQ :)), on different characters with different strength parties, each time we've charged and defeated the QIQ. Everyone being a coward all the time is boring, just as everyone acting the badass all the time is.
I forget what I was writing about.
Okay, about that duergar quest.
You go in, archers start hitting you, and you back off to plan what to do next.
While you're in the middle of talking with your mates, here comes said archers around the corner like a bunch of idiots, and you kill them, effectively reducing the size of the defending force by half.
Excuse me, but the PCs in that situation have done nothing lame, meta, weak, shallow, or any other adjective you can come up with. They have remained in character, they have done what makes perfect sense in a situation like that, and they have not broken any rule of the server. Expecting PCs to charge in a situation like that is, quite frankly, ridiculous.
There are situations that occasionally come up with the game engine where a player is confronted with the choice of doing something utterly out of character or taking some small advantage of a flaw in the engine. When faced with that choice, I am always going to remain in character.
It is unreasonable to expect a PC to suicide themselves because they triggered some unexpected design flaw. That kind of expectation adds nothing whatsoever to immersion, realism, fair play, or any other gaming virtue you care to name.
There is no way to avoid situations like this. They are a part of NWN. In 99% of the cases where something like this comes up, we're talking about a net advantage of less than twenty hit points, so the best way to deal with them is to simply ignore them. We're here to play, not to get hung up on little ticky-picky problems that have next to zero impact on the overall balance of the server.
Dealing with a combat bug, more often than not, involves some minimum amount of communication. Unless the DMs want to turn on the Player Pause option, there is no way to satisfactorily handle these problems when they arise in combat without breaking immersion, stopping whatever is going on at the time, and communicating OOC about how best to move forward. That's just a pain in the ass, and it's simply not worth all the trouble.
If someone is trying to cheat the AI to the extent that they gain some advantage over others, it will be plainly obvious that they are doing so. In all other cases like this, please just trust the players' judgment. No one wants to feel like they're being second-guessed every time they come across a bug.
I really think a lot of good points have been raised in this thread and will say that most of you have completely 100% the right idea about things. That said, if there is a case such as the duergar quest, where luring just happens -- send us a private bug report and we'll deal with it.
Ladies and gentlemen, the Duergar Q has been changed, and has been changed in a magnificent way. No more luring the shit.
Good job, and stop whining please!
Never did the Duerger Q, but would like to mention that I often see on some quests the "archer solitude-ness-ish" tactic.
One stationary archer gets attacked and he fires back and the other stationary archers are picking their noses. The party will then pick off one at a time. Vrudash thinks this is lame-O. Either the party should force them all to attack at once, make archers more aware of their surroundings or bring in gongs that some fool can hit that will sound the alert for the others.
My personal view of things, is that, if the AI cannot be fixed, there is no point complaining. I've heard numerous people argue that abusing the AI is in fact better than risking it, which I disagree strongly with.
Archers cannot really be fixed, so either charge them, or do not fight. You cannot say it is OOC to charge them when by far the most OOC option there is to actually reduce the archers to meat by walking behind a wall.
Just set it into the perception event for archers that they give a silent talk message and anytime the archers see something that is hostile and they start to attack, any nearby (within reasonable range) melee monster that is not already in combat will run in the direction they are shooting while nearby archers pick one of the players near the original PC and start firing away, once they hear the silent talk message. They even have this in the SoU OC when you open certain chests, nearby stuff comes to attack you.
It isn't hard to do and would effectively create 'npc tactics' as mentioned somewhat above. Yay for no more luring and retarded monsters who just stand there as their friends are attacked.. >.>
You could also place 'cover' triggers in places susceptible to archer luring in any quest, and whenever a PC enters these it signals any archer fixed on them to stop attacking. This way the people who use the excuse "we were backing up to discuss tactics" can actually do so without having the hordes of fodder chasing after them 'accidentally'.
tactics: kill them
I applaud this attitude, Gippy. That's a brilliant solution. A lot of the potential abuses of luring could be repaired by simple mechanical fixes like the aforementioned barricade on the bridge. If the idea is to have the archers stay back and let the melee spawns charge the interlopers on Duergar or any other quest, the problem might also be solved by one of the following (I've only rudimentarilly experimented in the toolset, but think these might work):
1. a placeable trigger that spawns some "guards" who are set with waypoints to walk toward the trigger point, and thus "encounter" the party that was attempting to lure. This would simulate the archers spotting the advancing party and summoning aid from the others in the camp. This might be a problem with sneak types, but is a workaround. You could always claim the marching Duergar (or whoever) were just on patrol - like an old school wandering monster, which must now be avoided.
2. Restructure the encounter area. Maybe the archers are on an island or a small elevation and cannot advance, yet the footmen CAN get through because they take a different route. Make the island or rise accessible via a mini-transition, maybe one that's hard to get to - like Vrazdn, so charging is NOT the best tactic because you'll get shredded.
I am sure I am fully guilty of luring on many occasions, but to be honest, it's an accidental consequence of an IC action - if my mage is walking around and gets spotted, he's going to run. Like hell he's going to charge a group! Similarly, when he has consciously used a "lure" I make sure it's with non-intelligent beasts (like snakes on the snakes quest) - figuring they wouldn't be contacting each other.
Quote from: Gippy;149329I think this has room for internal discussion amongst the DM staff.
I know the issues of spawns not being able to communicate with one another
My personal opinion is that certain quest designs encourage some sort of luring, perhaps the biggest example is the duergar quest, and I think that needs to be solved from a quest design standpoint. For example, simply placing a barrier down on the bridge will stop the crossbowmen from racing around a corner and being made into mince.
Deliberate luring, like Meldread mentions, of course is not appropriate. However some amount of luring is going to happen no matter what. In an ideal situation the AI would act and respond organically. It falls on both sides of the DM/PC line to minimize this unintentional luring.
Remember that we're all story tellers here. What sort of story are you telling when you say that the intelligent monsters ran around the corner with their bows out and got ripped to pieces because they saw you looking at them funny?
or give archers weapons =]
If we are going to start screwing with the AI of the monsters, perhaps we also need to deal with the "Oh so unhandy"..
auto attack of PC's trying to get the hell back from said NPC's. Doesn't make much sense to charge knowing full well if you need to drop back and heal, your PC will automatically attack everything that gets near him, pretty much ensuring your death if this becomes the case, and if you blindly charge archers, this will happen repeatedly.
If you're talking about Attacks of Opportunity, those are not going anywhere. It's hard coded behavior, though easy to work around.
:mrgreen:
I had nothing to say, but this topic is awesome.
Awesome like me?
There's a difference between luring and accidentally having NPCs walk around the corner. Often tied to how repeatedly it happens. Why are you not using scouts to check the place beforehand and why turn back at the open room to plan when one has already just pushed ahead before getting there?
You know yourselves if you are abusing the AI. It's easy for us to see as well. Don't worry so much about it, be cool and have fun.
QuoteIf we are going to start screwing with the AI of the monsters, perhaps we also need to deal with the "Oh so unhandy"..
auto attack of PC's trying to get the hell back from said NPC's. Doesn't make much sense to charge knowing full well if you need to drop back and heal, your PC will automatically attack everything that gets near him, pretty much ensuring your death if this becomes the case, and if you blindly charge archers, this will happen repeatedly.
Can't you just walk out in detect mode and constantly click the floor? I don't think it is an exploit as long as you do not walk backwards.
I'm late to the party, but I can totally see instances of when 'luring' may very well be the IC response and legitimate battle plan. An example would be a single gnome popping out and taunting a group of kobolds, then running away, leading the kobolds into a trap. Racial hatred plus what looks to be an easy target...
There are also differences between races you might take into account. Low int, savage creatures (eg Gnolls or Orcs) vs disciplined and intelligent creatures (eg Duergar).
I think 'luring' crosses the line when you start pulling single mobs out of groups of enemies to take them one at a time; running to cover under a hail of arrows may be considered lame, but I don't think it crosses the line to cheating.
Honestly, I think that the 'line' is pretty apparent, for all the discussion in this thread I think most people know the difference between ICly ducking behind cover and AI Abuse.
QuoteHonestly, I think that the 'line' is pretty apparent, for all the discussion in this thread I think most people know the difference between ICly ducking behind cover and AI Abuse.
Yes. Everybody knew not to lure in the first place. The problem was that because this thread was made, and because of some miscommunications, people mistakenly came to believe that Luring is not acceptable ever, even on accident. Obviously that caused a backlash.
Word to the wise: If you want to avoid those pesky AoOs, especially when invisible, equip a missile weapon. It can be a simple sling. No more whacking mobs when you had no intention of doing so.
Doesn't help much for heavy combat situations, but for stealthers it's invaluable.
Hah, invaluable until you misclick while navigating tricky terrain and shoot that mob you were trying to avoid :-(
Quote from: AfroMullet;149627Can't you just walk out in detect mode and constantly click the floor? I don't think it is an exploit as long as you do not walk backwards.
Shift click. Walk, don't run.
Or even just use the keyboard god damn.
Quote from: FleetingHeart;149707Hah, invaluable until you misclick while navigating tricky terrain and shoot that mob you were trying to avoid :-(
In that case, you'd be screwed no matter what you had equipped.
It's a game ffs! Have fun! If you're doing something thats blatantly cheating you know you are, live with the fact you're a cheater. If while playing, game mechanics and AI makes it come down to a PC death or an NPC death I feel the benifit of the doubt should lean toward the PC's (that all die eventualy anyway).
Question, is luring a group entirely made of archers (so that you don't divide them, you merely drive them to you) also not allowed?
And if it's soemthig stupid, like cobras?
EDIT: Well, spitting snakes... or whatever.
I think if there's groups of intelligent archers running towards you to fire their bows at you and die then there's a level design flaw. If it's snakes then they're just stupid and don't worry about it.
I think there is a relatively simple answer. Try not to deliberately lure AI but in the end isn't it better to be accidentally lame to AI than PC's being lamed by AI?
There are some situations which I find unclear whether it is exploiting or not.
For example, the gnoll quest's final room: is it okay to lure them all (not just the archers) into the corridor because it's narrow and because anyone with a minimum of intelligence who sees the runes on the ground can supect there can be traps? Are gnolls supposed not to fall to that kind of strategy and stay in the room, or could they be lured?
Quote from: Enigma;150819There are some situations which I find unclear whether it is exploiting or not.
For example, the gnoll quest's final room: is it okay to lure them all (not just the archers) into the corridor because it's narrow and because anyone with a minimum of intelligence who sees the runes on the ground can supect there can be traps? Are gnolls supposed not to fall to that kind of strategy and stay in the room, or could they be lured?
You shouldn't lure them, but that dispel trap tends to kill everyone if you don't.
Luring groups into narrow corridors is fine. It becomes exploiting when you are luring only one or two when the rest of the group of monsters will just stand there. If you make it a point to bring most or all of the group you see towards the chokepoint it is fine (usually! .. Unless they are archers which sparked this whole thing. Don't use corners to lure archers!)
In this case of the gnoll quest, it's totally good to run in and grab their attention then run back to the door and fight them in the narrow hall so only a couple have room to get to you.
Quit being wimps and charge into that room like a real man.
Word.
+1
One thing I'll do if I want the enemy to come to me without me having to go to them is fire one arrow at each target. I suppose there's absolutely nothing wrong with this at all, is there?
It occurred to me that one of those firebombs or acid bombs would be perfect for this sort of thing, since it hits everything near the target for 1hp each. It seems like a device made for just such a situation. Perhaps we could see more of those?
In my experience, some quests are too dificult to complete without luring. And nobody is going to risk that much just because.
Hoever luring does make IG sence, if you use arrows of cource.
"Yo, bob"
"Yeah?"
"That guy is shooting arrows at us"
"So?"
"Just sayin"
Does not happen, if there is a guy firing at you and then running away (like guerrilla hunters) the natural thing to do is to chase him, even if you know it is an ambush, because otherwise the guy will just keep shooting arrows at you, he, form safe distance, you defenceless and taking damage.
So it does make sence, Lulzebub's suggestion is exelent.
Quote from: Universal Predator;149334A 'must charge' rule is simply silly. There are smart characters. Playing them dumb is bad play. Also, not all characters are brave. Even some frontliners are cowards or not dumb enough to just charge. Besides, there are AI mobs that use luring tactics. Why cannot PCs do it?
If you think the AI is as smart as you, then.. well...you can be defined as:
- Predictable
- Incapable of learning
- Incapable of foresight
- Dumb
If not, then you should understand why it (the AI) can be exploited and stop finding reasons for you to justify exploiting it.
The AI/DM can lure you because you are smart and can react to it as your character would (low wisdom go into the trap, high wisdom notice something fishy). The AI can't do that.
It's fine to play a coward, but its easy to tell the difference between a well roleplayed coward and someone who just uses cowardice or intelligence as an excuse to exploit AI. Good cowards make for funny remarks and bring a smile to your face. Intelligent chars make those witty remarks and do more than just find ways to exploit mobs or read the battleground.
@drakil: IF a guy shoots bullets/arrows at me, I dont chase him, I take cover. The AI can't take cover. That's way too complex for the NWN AI. Every PC should know how to take cover and do when showered with spells or arrows. They dont run 1 at a time toward the source of the spells or arrows.
This isn't brain surgery, it's just curtesy.
Some of us aren't that good or fast of typists to stop in the middle of combat to make witty remarks. I can stand and RP all day long while there is no fight going on, once in combat most of my PC's get a bit quiet. Sorry... I say let DM's watch me and if they think I'm taking advantage of AI then spank me. If I have time where my PC is NOT going to die then I'll make witty RP comments to justify what I did. This is a game folks, it shouldn't be about the NPC's, it should be about giving the PC's the benefit of the doubt and letting the players have fun.
Sorry... NEVER will I have a PC charge a half dozen NPC's because somebody else says I should. Even a moronic child would step back from those kind of odds. When I'm told I have to, I will stop playing this server.
//sorry double post...
And to all you people that say you should charge them, I say then QUIT buffing before starting a quest! Ya cheats!
Damn i was lured back to this thread.