Isolate and Kill vs. Neuter and Ignore: Which Control tactic do you prefer?

[the Jester]

There are two wizards in my campaign. The first is a tome of readiness build, the second is an Essentials enchanter. They have very different styles- one is very strikerish, the other is much more pure control with little damage. They are approximately equally effective imho. Both are awesome.

Since I hardly ever play (as opposed to dming), that's what my opinion (I like both) is based on.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

Umm, why would you neuter the less dangerous creatures?

I meant "less dangerous because neutered", not "less dangerous by their very nature".

Most encounters have a lynchpin. Take it out and the rest of the fight is a cakewalk.

That is true. It has nothing to do with my question.

 

[KarinsDad]

Most encounters have a lynchpin. Take it out and the rest of the fight is a cakewalk.

I've always considered the weakest foes to be the lynchpin, not the strongest NPC (with the rare exception that if the strongest falls, the rest flee) or even the NPC controller.

For example, say that you have 3 standard foes and an elite. The group can focus fire and kill one standard foe in one round, or the elite in two rounds. The elite does 20% more damage (this is high, but the elite probably has at least one rider encounter power) than a standard, say 12 points instead of 10.

Attacking the elite first:

round 1) foes do 42 damage
round 2) foes do 42 damage
round 3) foes do 30 damage
round 4) foes do 20 damage
round 5) foes do 10 damage

Attacking the standards first:

round 1) foes do 42 damage
round 2) foes do 32 damage
round 3) foes do 22 damage
round 4) foes do 12 damage
round 5) foes do 12 damage

In the first case, the NPCs get 14 attacks in for 144 damage.

In the second case, the NPCs get 11 attacks in for 120 damage. The attacks on average are stronger, but there are fewer of them.

It typically takes a longer time to take out stronger monsters such that the monsters get in more attacks total within the encounter if the PCs ignore the weaker foes. And with fewer attack rolls per encounter, the odds of NPCs getting one or more criticals on the PCs in an encounter drops as well.


There are exceptions to every rule (e.g. a foe who can attack multiple PCs every round), but I've found that the weaker foes fall quicker and hence give the PCs an action economy advantage over their foes faster.

As a player, I almost always try to take the toughest foes out last.

Using this as the primary strategy, Neuter and Destroy tends to work even better than Isolate and Kill as long as the toughest foes are the ones being Neutered.

Using the example above and assuming that the Neutered foe can be neutered for 2 rounds starting in round 1:

Attacking the neutered elite first:

round 1) foes do 30 damage
round 2) foes do 30 damage
round 3) foes do 30 damage
round 4) foes do 20 damage
round 5) foes do 10 damage

Attacking the standards first:

round 1) foes do 30 damage
round 2) foes do 20 damage
round 3) foes do 22 damage
round 4) foes do 12 damage
round 5) foes do 12 damage

12 attacks 120 damage vs. 9 attacks 96 damage.


This doesn't always work, but it's a fairly good tactical rule of thumb.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

Using this as the primary strategy, Neuter and Destroy tends to work even better than Isolate and Kill as long as the toughest foes are the ones being Neutered.

I recognize that I can't fully control the comments just because I started the thread, but it would be helpful if we all either used the terms I proposed or explained what they mean by the alternatives they use. In this case, I can't tell whether by "Neuter and Destroy" you mean what I called "Neuter and Ignore" or if you mean something else entirely. Could you please clarify that for me?

 

[KarinsDad]

I recognize that I can't fully control the comments just because I started the thread, but it would be helpful if we all either used the terms I proposed or explained what they mean by the alternatives they use. In this case, I can't tell whether by "Neuter and Destroy" you mean what I called "Neuter and Ignore" or if you mean something else entirely. Could you please clarify that for me?

With only one word being changed, I'm surprised that you couldn't figure out my simple terminology mistake there.

I meant Neuter and Ignore (sorry, but I'm too old to remember how people phrase things word for word, and too lazy to go back and double check what I wrote to ensure it had no mistakes), but it could just as easilly be Neuter and Destroy as per the second to last example that I illustrated.

In that case though, Neuter and Ignore (last case) worked better than Neuter and Destroy (second to last case), just like it did in the second case of Isolate and Kill on standard monsters (second case) being superior to Isolate and Kill on an elite (first case).

As it turned out in those examples, Neuter and Destroy (i.e. neuter the BBEG and keep attacking him while he is neutered) was a viable option, tied for the second best. So, you should consider it as a possiblity, even if you didn't put it in your poll and even if it did crop into the discussion accidently.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

With only one word being changed, I'm surprised that you couldn't figure out my simple terminology mistake there.

Some earlier commentors also created their own wording. Incenjucar prefers "neuter and kill", for example, but in that case seems to mean something quite different from what you did. I just wanted to be clear.

I meant Neuter and Ignore (sorry, but I'm too old to remember how people phrase things word for word, and too lazy to go back and double check what I wrote to ensure it had no mistakes), but it could just as easilly be Neuter and Destroy as per the second to last example that I illustrated.

I understand, I'm old too.

In that case though, Neuter and Ignore (last case) worked better than Neuter and Destroy (second to last case), just like it did in the second case of Isolate and Kill on standard monsters (second case) being superior to Isolate and Kill on an elite (first case).

As it turned out in those examples, Neuter and Destroy (i.e. neuter the BBEG and keep attacking him while he is neutered) was a viable option, tied for the second best. So, you should consider it as a possiblity, even if you didn't put it in your poll and even if it did crop into the discussion accidently.

The thing is, Neuter and Destroy is basically just "focus fire", which is not a very interesting tactic, nore one that I thought was worth a lot of discussion. Apparently there are those who disagree with me.

 

[Incenjucar]

Party composition, group tactical choices, and the specifics of the fight contribute to a lot of it. My DM tends to throw out "boss" monsters and groups of mooks, and my group is large (we have two of every role except defender), so the usual situation is that my invoker and the defender lock down the heavies, the wizard and the bow ranger pop the mooks, the lazy warlord and barbarian work together on the scariest squishie, and the cleric heals.

 

[KarinsDad]

The thing is, Neuter and Destroy is basically just "focus fire", which is not a very interesting tactic, nore one that I thought was worth a lot of discussion.

Not necessarily.

All of options so far in the thread are focus fire.

But the advantage of Neuter and Destroy is when the Elite has some devastating attacks of his own. The Standards just do damage for the most part.

To prevent the Elite from Stunning or Weakening or even just using an attack that hits most of the PCs on the board, or some other devastating effect on the party, the PCs should Neuter him first, then wipe him out. It would be pretty rare compared to Neutering and Ignoring an Elite (since that is often the best tactic possible), but some bad guys are just so nasty that you need to focus everything you have on them first.


This applies to an Elite, but probably not most Solos. Solos take too long to wipe out. An Elite can be wiped out quickly, even if not all of the damage is done while he is neutered. Neuter and Ignore is much better for a Solo because PCs have to get to 5 on 1 as quickly as possible if the Solo has allies.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I
That is true. It has nothing to do with my question.

You are asking what strategy is best of two. I think a third strategy is best and said why.

If you only want to talk about your two strategies, I can go elsewhere.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

All of options so far in the thread are focus fire.

That's not true. Neuter and Ignore is explicitly not focus fire -- you have already (usually) damaged the creature with the attack(s) needed to neuter it, and then you shift to a different target. Depending on what powers the party has available, continuing to neuter the creature might even require multiple attacks.