Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Isolate and Kill vs. Neuter and Ignore: Which Control tactic do you prefer?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5489941" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>Attacking the elite first:</p><p></p><p>round 1) foes do 42 damage</p><p>round 2) foes do 42 damage</p><p>round 3) foes do 30 damage</p><p>round 4) foes do 20 damage</p><p>round 5) foes do 10 damage</p><p></p><p>Attacking the standards first:</p><p></p><p>round 1) foes do 42 damage</p><p>round 2) foes do 32 damage</p><p>round 3) foes do 22 damage</p><p>round 4) foes do 12 damage</p><p>round 5) foes do 12 damage</p><p></p><p>In the first case, the NPCs get 14 attacks in for 144 damage.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>As a player, I almost always try to take the toughest foes out last.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>Using the example above and assuming that the Neutered foe can be neutered for 2 rounds starting in round 1:</p><p></p><p>Attacking the neutered elite first:</p><p></p><p>round 1) foes do 30 damage</p><p>round 2) foes do 30 damage</p><p>round 3) foes do 30 damage</p><p>round 4) foes do 20 damage</p><p>round 5) foes do 10 damage</p><p></p><p>Attacking the standards first:</p><p></p><p>round 1) foes do 30 damage</p><p>round 2) foes do 20 damage</p><p>round 3) foes do 22 damage</p><p>round 4) foes do 12 damage</p><p>round 5) foes do 12 damage</p><p></p><p>12 attacks 120 damage vs. 9 attacks 96 damage.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This doesn't always work, but it's a fairly good tactical rule of thumb.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 5489941, member: 2011"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Isolate and Kill vs. Neuter and Ignore: Which Control tactic do you prefer?
Top