From the WotC Boards: Mearls on 'Aggro'

[The Merciful]

However, an "aggro" mechanic is such an obviously bad idea for D&D that I am dismayed they wasted their time considering it. I am concerned that they may waste too much time testing and discarding such obviously bad ideas, so that the good ideas are not as fully developed as they otherwise would be.

Well, turns out agro mechanics were such "an obiviously bad" idea WotC ended up using them. Yup, making it so that turning your attention from the fighter allows him wreak havoc or that paladin has an ability to make attacks on party members other than himself weaker are agro mechanics through and through. They both direct the enemy's attention, which agro/thread is all about. As a matter of fact both mechanics will available for tanks in the upcoming Warhammer Online MMO (Knight of the Blazing Sun and Black Orc to give class names).

The horror...

 

[amethal]

Well, turns out agro mechanics were such "an obiviously bad" idea WotC ended up using them. Yup, making it so that turning your attention from the fighter allows him wreak havoc or that paladin has an ability to make attacks on party members other than himself weaker are agro mechanics through and through. They both direct the enemy's attention, which agro/thread is all about.

Thanks, but we are using such different definitions of aggro mechanics that I don't think we can have a meaningful discussion.

For what it is worth, I mean aggro mechanics in the sense that the monster (or the DM, if you prefer) is compelled to attack a specific PC.

It appears that using attacks of opportunity could be an "aggro mechanic" using your approach, so it wouldn't be a fourth edition topic anyway.

Also, I think Mike Mearls (as refered to in the opening post) is using a definition closer to mine, since he is under the impression that aggro mechanics were tried and then discarded.

As a matter of fact both mechanics will available for tanks in the upcoming Warhammer Online MMO (Knight of the Blazing Sun and Black Orc to give class names).

I don't think this is relevant to a D&D discussion.

 

[Victim]

Actually, it's relatively easy to make "smart" AI for an MMOs.

1. Identify healer.
2. Nuke healer into the ground.
3. Identify wizard.
4. Nuke wizard into the ground.

The issue is not that AI is not smart, it's that this style of gameplay is not fun (at least is not fun if you have differing levels of survivability). Thus we have the aggro mechanic which can be manipulated, which makes the game interesting.

That's as much a result of monster/character stats and the overall combat model as it is the AI though. In Wow, for instance, healing is powerful while healers are pretty fragile. Change the combat model so healing is less critical and healer target priority (in a 'smart') drops. Or you make the healer hard to take out - like a WoW healing pally or a DnD cleric.

And PvP can be fun, despite the lack of AI restrictions on targeting. It just runs on some different assumptions.

 

[erisred]

*Simple*

Because the "bodyguard" role that I'd wager is one of the most common roles in fiction just DOES NOT WORK in D&D. Unless you are in a corridor with your charge behind you, there was nothing preventing the enemy from simply ignoring you (sure, in 3E, you eat an attack of opportunity but the tradeoff...in D&D before AoO? There's nothing for the enemy to worry about).

The thing is, in fiction, this doesn't happen. The enemy can't ignore the bodyguard due to the "one hit, you're dead" feature of most fiction.

The aggro mechanic was created to try and get this _COMMON_ role in fiction to actually work.

I see your point, but...me scratches head...in a game with humans on both side, surely that should all be a matter of roleplaying during the combat rather than hard and fast rules. If the bodyguard can stay between the PC and the VINPC, then the PC will have to fight his way through, over, past the bodyguard. OTOH, if the PC can get past the bodyguard, taking AOO's on the way, he can do that, too.

There's a fighter in one of the games I'm running who believes her main role in life is to bodyguard the Elven Princess (another PC), and it's handled strictly though roleplaying...to the point of Rhaine being very upset if Khaira doesn't "stay back behind me" whenever there is any sort of threat in the area.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Not really. In many videogame RPGs, such as the Final Fantasy series, enemies essentially attack at random.

Sorry, they're in place in every non-stupid CRPG.

As such, you can't really say that Aggro rules (in which the idea is based on targetting the one doing the most damage to the monster) is universal.

That's not how aggro rules work, otherwise healers, buffers and crowd controllers would never draw aggro, which is absolutely not true.

 

[FadedC]

Sorry, they're in place in every non-stupid CRPG.

I could be wrong, but I got the impression that the latest version of FF did actually have an aggro system. It definitely seemed like the enemy disengaged from the warrior and went after my mage after a strong nuke. There were even spells that forced an enemy to attack a cerrtain target.

Previous versions featured random attacks, however characters could possess abilities that allowed them to jump in front of the person being attacked and take the hit instead. So in a sense every version contained some form of tanking.

 

[Gort]

Previous versions featured random attacks, however characters could possess abilities that allowed them to jump in front of the person being attacked and take the hit instead. So in a sense every version contained some form of tanking.

Perhaps some powers in this vein might be a better solution than an "aggro" or "mind control" suite of powers? After all, the problem is that the monster walks past the warrior and beats up the robed guys, so perhaps some kind of "interception" power that allows you to forgo an attack of opportunity to move between your ally and the enemy?

 

[GSHamster]

Perhaps some powers in this vein might be a better solution than an "aggro" or "mind control" suite of powers? After all, the problem is that the monster walks past the warrior and beats up the robed guys, so perhaps some kind of "interception" power that allows you to forgo an attack of opportunity to move between your ally and the enemy?

Unfortunately, this ability ("Intercept") was introduced in World of Warcraft (Warrior ability gained at level 70, I believe) and thus can no longer be used in D&D.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Sorry, they're in place in every non-stupid CRPG.

Err... what? You should clarify that pretty quickly, or I am just going to take that as an crude insult. I am going to be fair and assume thst you are not just saying either that the games are all somehow ihernetly bad, and don't count, or that they are games for stupid people. The only other interpretation I can think of is that they are games with stupid AI (which may be true), but that kind of claim is irrelevant at this point.

You did not specify any type of RPG in your claim that every computer/console RPG has aggro mechanics. In other words, you are referring to the sum of all RPGs. That claim is false, and you can't just try to pull out of it by dismissing my point as applying only to "stupid-RPGs".

That's not how aggro rules work, otherwise healers, buffers and crowd controllers would never draw aggro, which is absolutely not true.

So what? I know this well enough, and it is totally beside my point.

No matter what draws the aggro, aggro rules are always based on a monster attacking whatever annoys it the most. They assume that tanks must annoy monsters more than other characters in order to protect the party, and that monsters can freely move around and attack what they want. Fundamantally, they are a product of MMORPGs which have never implemented a system of allowing formation tactics and physical blocking of enemy movement.

There are many other systems in which enemy targetting is not based on aggrevation or risk to the monster, but on the monster's ability to do damage (pretty much the rule in tactical RPGs), or on random chance (pretty much the rule in all traditional Japanese RPGs). I would say that these games probably outnumber MMORPGs that use the aggro system, and certainly count for enough to not be totally disregarded.

Of important note is that the videogames that most resemble D&D, Japanese tactical RPGs like Final Fantasy Tactics, Disgaea, Fire Emblem, and Super Robot Taisen, don't use aggro rules at all. Enemy AI primarily operates on opportunism and dealing damage as quickly as possible to whoever is within reach, and protecting weaker allies is built entirely on tactical movement (Fire Emblem's shoving and rescuing, moving to safe terrain, Disgaea's lift/throw, etc).

 

[Xyl]

But the chain of evidence takes it back to GURPS, which was written by Steve Jackson, who used to work for TSR in England, and TSR was founded by Gary, who co-created D&D.

Feats - Fallout - GURPS - Jackson - TSR - D&D

Six degrees! It all goes back to D&D.

Hmm, let's look at World of Warcraft. It was obviously inspired by the success of Diablo, which was originally modeled on Nethack, which incorporates rules from D&D.

WoW - Diablo - Nethack - D&D

Only four degrees. Funny how everything connects, isn't it?