Multiple Victims for one Swarm

[Zathraas]

The description of swarms says they attack the closest living creature. Suppose a fighter is standing in front of a rogue and the swarm is moving to attack. The swarm takes up 4 5’ squares, so can technically take up squares of both characters, but would it choose to do so?

 

[lukelightning]

I'd say yes.

 

[Pielorinho]

I'd agree. Remember that the swarm is modelling a bunch of bitty creatures who want to get in on the killing action. Those that can't attack the fighter are going to be looking for the nearest creature they CAN attack, which would be the rogue. Since they can attack her without breaking the cardinal rule of not moving away from their other swarmmates, they'll do so.

Daniel

 

[Zathraas]

Isn’t the swarm – which is treated as a single creature – already attacking the closest creature and thus already getting some nourishment? It seems that if a swarm of bats is flying around a 10x10 area, and they attack a lone fighter, it is not just the bats in the single 5’ square that are “getting a taste” but the entire swarm is actually flying in and out of each square in the area and taking a bite when they fly by.

 

[robberbaron]

I'd say yes, but the swarm might not attack both initially, as it might count as moving through an enemy. Once the fighter was surrounded, however, it could move on as a 5' scurry the next round.
I reckon the little critters would go for whatever meat was on offer.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I would have the swarm attack as many of the nearest creatures as it could. Although the spell does say "attacks or pursues the nearest creature", remember that it also says "attacks all other creatures within its area." I don't see why it wouldn't make an effort to put as many of those nearest creatures within its area.