D&D 5E Enemies should only attack when they have advantage (and other quick tips)

[GMforPowergamers]

Whether or not this is effective depends on the power level of the monster relative to the PC's. In general, if the monsters needed an 18 or better to hit the PC's anyway, using actions to improve the chance of success probably is worthwhile. On the other hand, if they needed some more typical value to hit - say a 14 - making two attacks is generally better than one attack with advantage because of the possibility of two lucky hits.

that isn't how it works though.

round 1 I generate advantage for round 2
round 2 I roll 2 attack rolls and take the better.
compaired to
over 2 rounds I make 2 attack rolls and both can either hit or miss...

assuming the same 2 d20 rolls the 2nd is ALWAYS better.

both rolls can hit, both rolls can miss one can hit and one miss... but in scenero 1 no matter what even if you drop 2 20's you can only hit once...

and as we saw the advantage he is generating (pushing prone) isn't even going to last

However, there is a strong DMing nugget of wisdom in this in that you should always try to run fights where the monsters have interesting things to do. In other words, how does the monster plan to reliably gain advantage versus the PCs? What challenge is the monster going to present to the PC's?

again I agree doing interesting things and giving interesting things is best... but not playing the monsters stupid constantly pushing targets prone to no effect

 

[DEFCON 1]

At least as far as the prone thing is concerned... the actual tactic to my mind is the orc that goes right after the paladin is the one to knock him prone, and then several other orcs can move up and attack the prone paladin on their turns to gain Advantage before the paladin can get back up again.

Or another option is you've given the orc a battlemaster-like maneuver as part of Multiattack where the orc can hit the paladin and knocks him prone at the same time (thus causing damage and prone) and then on the second swing of Multiattack the orc has advantage on it.

So it all comes down to how any particular DM sets up their monsters and combats.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

At least as far as the prone thing is concerned... the actual tactic to my mind is the orc that goes right after the paladin is the one to knock him prone, and then several other orcs can move up and attack the prone paladin on their turns to gain Advantage before the paladin can get back up again.

Or another option is you've given the orc a battlemaster-like maneuver as part of Multiattack where the orc can hit the paladin and knocks him prone at the same time (thus causing damage and prone) and then on the second swing of Multiattack the orc has advantage on it.

So it all comes down to how any particular DM sets up their monsters and combats.

that sounds much better then what the OP has said so far.

 

[Charlaquin]

I've been trying to make my combats more exciting without a ton more pre-planning. I don't always know if an encounter is going to be combat, social, or exploration, so I find that trying to prep dynamic combats never works out for me. Often I put a lot of work into thinking up urgent stakes, a dynamic battlefield, and strategic enemies... and then the players decide to negotiate or sneak by!

So to make my combats more exciting and dynamic in the moment, I've been using this little rule of thumb:

Enemies only attack when they have advantage.

Okay, first off, that's a very soft "only." Sometimes it makes sense for an enemy to attack even if they don't have advantage, such as a big snake that grapples on a successful hit.

But in general, if an enemy doesn't have advantage, I have them do something else. Often this is an effort to get advantage on their next attack, or an ally's attack. Maybe they knock a character prone. Maybe they disengage and run. Maybe they douse the lights. Maybe they improvise!

Since I started following this guideline, combat has been a lot more fun. I don't have to plan out dynamic combats in advance, because I know my enemies are going to be moving around the battlefield, doing crazy things like knocking over columns or setting things on fire. I can't say combat has been more deadly (it definitely hasn't been), but it's been more exciting!

...

Do you have any quick tips to use during a combat (not during prep!) that keeps the fight exciting and fun?

You’ve just jogged a memory. During the open playtest, I think my group was unconsciously running things this way, and it was awesome. Not like as a rule, but advantage was this cool new mechanic that we all wanted to use, so there was a lot more improvising of actions in combat to try and gain advantage, and it absolutely did make combat more dynamic and fun. I’m going to try to bring this back in my own games.

 

[Charlaquin]

My only issue with this is that it is ineffective, and I can't imagine PCs every doing it.

If round 1 I don't have advantage but I set up so round 2 I do... and round 2 I attack with advantage I am rolling 2d20 and the best I can do is hit once. If I had attacked both rounds I still roll 2d20 just 1 per round and if both hit I hit twice...

add to this attempts that fail to gain advantage being completely dead turns.

This is true if you’re only setting yourself up for advantage next turn. However, if you can set at least two of your allies up for advantage on their turns, it’s well worth it.

 

[Celebrim]

that isn't how it works though.

No, that is how it works. What you want to be calculating is expected damage.

Suppose you have a goblin that needs 18's to hit the PC's and does 1d6 damage. The goblin has a choice of two attacks or one attack with advantage.

If two attacks the expected damage (ignoring critical hits) is 3.5 x .15 x 2 = 1.05.

If one attack with advantage the expected damage is 3.5 x (.15 + (.85 * .15)) = 0.97. So even with needing an 18 to hit, trading two attacks for one with advantage is a net loss - just not really by much. (This kind of surprised me how weak advantage was, but thinking about it the advantage system most advantages attackers that don't need it in the first place.)

But then imagine the attacker is a bugbear that needs a 12 to hit and does 2d8+3 damage.

If two attacks the expected damage is 5 x .45 x 2 = 4.5. If one attack with advantage the expected damage is 5 x (.45 + (.45 * .55)) = 3.4875. Because the my chance to hit on a single attack is higher than before, I'm losing more by taking advantage.

You are neglecting that if I make two attacks there is always a chance I will hit with both. The better the chance of hitting, the more favored attacking without advantage will be.

 

[Charlaquin]

To be fair, he was talking about doing it as a GM as a way to make combat more than just a series of repeated smacks. Players will likely go with whatever does the most damage, but it's worthwhile for a GM to do what they can to add richness to the combat.

I would bet though that if you do this as the DM, your players will follow suit. There’s a tendency for players to treat their character’s features as their menu of options and not think outside of it. But seeing the monsters frequently improvising actions and gaining advantage as a result will remind players that they can do the same. They might not do it every turn, but the’ll be more likely to look for opportunities to do it.

 

[Charlaquin]

except it adds artificial variety, and makes an already easy game easier. Where I can imagine it being fun for a fight or two, overtime it is just as predictable "Does have advantage yes/no" is just an extra step

I run my monsters like the PCs

I think the idea is not to make it a hard rule that monsters never attack unless they have advantage. More of a general guideline that monsters will seek to gain advantage when they can, often using their action to gain it or grant it to an ally instead of attacking.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

No, that is how it works. What you want to be calculating is expected damage.

nope....nope nope....

if I attack round 1 I have 1d20 with X chance to hit
if I attack round 2 I have the same chance to hit

if I ONLY attack round I can only hit once and I am still rolling the smae 2d20.

Suppose you have a goblin that needs 18's to hit the PC's and does 1d6 damage. The goblin has a choice of two attacks or one attack with advantage.

If two attacks the expected damage (ignoring critical hits) is 3.5 x .15 x 2 = 1.05.

If one attack with advantage the expected damage is 3.5 x (.15 + (.85 * .15)) = 0.97.

there are three types of lies, lies, damn lies, and statistics... if I roll a 12 and a 15 on round 2 or if I roll a 12 on round 1 and a 15 on round 2 I have the same bonus to hit... I either hit or miss... if the 12 hits it was better for me to attack twice if the 12 misses or both the 12 and 15 miss it is not better or worse either way...

we don't play by averages we play by roll... 2 chances to hit is better then1

So even with needing an 18 to hit, trading two attacks for one with advantage is a net loss - just not really by much.

no it isn't, you are rolling 2d20 and need an 18+.... but with advantage a 18 and a 19 generate 1 hit with 2 attack the 18 and the 19 generate 2 hits... if 1 or both are below 18 it did not help or hurt.

 

[Charlaquin]

the example is worse...it will never work the prone target will just get up before that attacker goes again

But if the monster has at least two allies that will act before the target, it’s a great move.