Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RHGreen" data-source="post: 5902018">Wouldn't part of this be solved by just saying that if you have an enemy next to you, you have to attack it (or one of them) as they are blocking your ability to attack any others.That seems to be one of the major problems I can see.Otherwise, it isn't all that unrealistic. Not if everyone is in a big scrum.The only other thing I can think is to give all attacks the ability to reduce movement to slow down reinforcements. That would be a good way of splitting targets as some would be attacking a close enemy, while others would be attacking enemies so they couldn't get into the fight, until the close enemy has been dealt with.Then you have archers. You do not get any advantage for paying attention to them. If you attack them, they shoot an arrow at you. If you concentrate fire on a target, they shoot an arrow at you. Perhaps if there was some kind of covering fire mechanic, where attacking them makes their aim really bad, it might be worth distracting them. You have three archers and a single PC uses covering fire giving them all a nasty penalty to attack, almost taking them out of the fight, for a moment or two, so your melee grunts can get to the boss.In fact, thinking about it, I think the best way to deal with this problem is to look at all the ways concentrated fire can be split up rather than just make one single overarching mechanic.I don't like marking because of the tracking part, I can't see liking a similar mechanic, however well it might fix the problem.So the start of a list of things that might encourage concentrated fire:1. The ability to target enemies that are not next to you when others are.2. Few general abilities that can effectively slow reinforcements and keep them out of the fight for a while. They are going to come like it or not.3. No advantage to engaging ranged enemies due to absence of any sort of covering fire mechanic.Just some thoughts, but it's a start anyway.</blockquote>

Verification