Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Runestar" data-source="post: 4402546" data-attributes="member: 72317">Even when the zombie minion is being marked by a paladin's divine challenge? I agree that there is not necessarily a 1-sized-fits-all solution to how monsters are supposed to react. However, the issue here is that the defender classes seem to have been conceptualized around the idea that enemies are going to want to attack them over and above anyone else, and provisions do not seem to have been made to accommodate different monster archetypes.For most part, I agree in principle with your list of guidelines on how individual monsters tend to react in those situations. However, this may result in the PCs' powers not working the way they expected them to (like the dragon opting to suck up the measly marking penalty and focus on attacking the wizard over anyone else), which might end up defeating the purpose of playing a defender in the first place, if you cannot get the enemy to want to attack you exclusively (which in turn means that you are unable to contribute effectively in your party).The way many of such similar powers were designed, it seems that the designers were operating under a rather stringent set of assumptions as to how the enemies would react in said scenarios. Deviating from them runs the risk of hosing certain PCs' capabilities (even if it seems to make sense or may make for a more varied gaming experience) because they either won't work or don't work properly, while adhering to them more or less runs the risk of every encounter being played similarly, though no PC would be shortchanged in this case.Where does one draw the line?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Runestar, post: 4402546, member: 72317"] Even when the zombie minion is being marked by a paladin's divine challenge? I agree that there is not necessarily a 1-sized-fits-all solution to how monsters are supposed to react. However, the issue here is that the defender classes seem to have been conceptualized around the idea that enemies are going to want to attack them over and above anyone else, and provisions do not seem to have been made to accommodate different monster archetypes. For most part, I agree in principle with your list of guidelines on how individual monsters tend to react in those situations. However, this may result in the PCs' powers not working the way they expected them to (like the dragon opting to suck up the measly marking penalty and focus on attacking the wizard over anyone else), which might end up defeating the purpose of playing a defender in the first place, if you cannot get the enemy to want to attack you exclusively (which in turn means that you are unable to contribute effectively in your party). The way many of such similar powers were designed, it seems that the designers were operating under a rather stringent set of assumptions as to how the enemies would react in said scenarios. Deviating from them runs the risk of hosing certain PCs' capabilities (even if it seems to make sense or may make for a more varied gaming experience) because they either won't work or don't work properly, while adhering to them more or less runs the risk of every encounter being played similarly, though no PC would be shortchanged in this case. Where does one draw the line? [/QUOTE]

Verification