DM forced to spread attacks

[Pielorinho]

Agreed with most of the above, but with a few provisos:

1) Some maddened opponents, as well as some stupid ones, use a revenge script for their attack choices. Basically, they attack someone who just hurt them. This allows PCs to use wolfpack tactics, in which they can somewhat control whom the monster attacks next.
2) Some relatively wimpy opponents will all gang up on a single PC at a time, whereas others will each choose someone to focus on. Each scenario can be interesting.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Mosquitoes & tse-tse flies want some words with you...

Depending on your argument those two can either be considered harmless (unlike the malaria or sleeping sickness they may carry) or largely harmless (most mosquitoes and tse-tse flies don't harbor those diseases, but of their teeming millions enough do carry them that even 1% would be a danger.)

Any one Cape bison is more likely to kill than any one tse-tse fly. But the fles outnumber the bulls by a huge ratio.

But there are so many mosquitoes and tse-tse that as a species they kill more people.

When given the choice between a pissed off bison or a hungry mosquito, which would you choose? (Malaria can be treated, being trampled flat... not so much. )

The Auld Grump

 

[Pielorinho]

Depending on your argument those two can either be considered harmless (unlike the malaria or sleeping sickness they may carry) or largely harmless (most mosquitoes and tse-tse flies don't harbor those diseases, but of their teeming millions enough do carry them that even 1% would be a danger.)

Any one Cape bison is more likely to kill than any one tse-tse fly. But the fles outnumber the bulls by a huge ratio.

But there are so many mosquitoes and tse-tse that as a species they kill more people.

When given the choice between a pissed off bison or a hungry mosquito, which would you choose? (Malaria can be treated, being trampled flat... not so much. )

I'm sorry to say, this whole argument is irrelevant. Mosquitos and tse-tse flies aren't animals. They're vermin.

 

[KiloGex]

If a creature can kill a character in one round, and the characters are higher than 1st level, then the encounter is definitely too high for them.

Any time the GM has to pull his punches or change his strategy because a monster hits too hard, then he's done something wrong.

 

[IronWolf]

If a creature can kill a character in one round, and the characters are higher than 1st level, then the encounter is definitely too high for them.

Any time the GM has to pull his punches or change his strategy because a monster hits too hard, then he's done something wrong.

There are too many variables at play for this to be an accurate statement.

 

[gamerprinter]

There are too many variables at play for this to be an accurate statement.

I guess the real question... is the CR appropriate for the party in question? If so, then there are other variables. However, if the monster is too tough for the party, it's going to mean dead PCs. Perhaps the OP's adventuring group lacks the synergy for effective combat, and perhaps the opponents need to be a lower CR.

 

[IronWolf]

I guess the real question... is the CR appropriate for the party in question? If so, then there are other variables. However, if the monster is too tough for the party, it's going to mean dead PCs. Perhaps the OP's adventuring group lacks the synergy for effective combat, and perhaps the opponents need to be a lower CR.

That sounds better phrased to me and a more accurate statement.

I know in the party I GM for an appropriate challenge for two of the players will slaughter the other two. An appropriate challenge for the other two plays will be a cakewalk for the first two.

 

[milo]

I'm sorry to say, this whole argument is irrelevant. Mosquitos and tse-tse flies aren't animals. They're vermin.

I didn't see a creature type in Auld Grumps response. He only used the term creature.

Aggressive herbivores are bad news - Cape Bison and hippos are the most dangerous creatures in Africa, other than humans....

 

[Squire James]

Assuming an intelligent foe, mostly only supremely overconfident ones would spread their attacks. If the foe is sitting at CR 4+ higher than party level, that kind of overconfidence may occur. Even then, if they're "spreading the love", they're spreading it with area attacks that do Xd6 energy damage and laughing maniacally, and NOT attacking 5 PC's with sword attacks that do 1d6+8 damage!

Another case I can think of is a monster that inflicts poison or bleed damage... they would spread their attacks to get as many PC's suffering as possible.

Unintelligent foes still usually focus their attacks, but are more likely to make poor decisions choosing their target. Some of them are simply unable to resist trying to chew on that adamantine plate armor even if it didn't work the last time!

 

[concerro]

Should a DM spread creatures attacks to attack multiple characters to save killing a character a round. If a creature kills a char a round is this creature to hard for the party of say 4 and one char is guarenteed to die usually the main tank.

That is a GM and group playstyle issue. Some groups like it when the GM's pull punches, and others do not. If a creature is so strong that it is almost guaranteed to kill the Hi AC, Hi HP character then either the character needs to be remade or the GM needs to pick a different monster though.