That player in the back of the room

KahlessNestor

Adventurer
The one thing I might recommend to the DM is that, if this player is consistently avoiding combat, and not even doing things like attempting Medicine checks to stabilize fallen party members, then the DM should experiment with not counting that player against the size of the party when adjusting encounter difficulty. The downside to that option is that the party will receive less combat XP as part of their adventures because of it, but since AL has no guarantee that a party will ever receive more XP in an adventure than the minimum allowed, that's just the breaks.

But isn't that ALSO a house rule and not allowed in AL? If he's sitting at the table with a character, he has to be counted, right?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

KahlessNestor

Adventurer
Yes, but most of those reasons don't make sense most of the time. Sure, there are reasons to ignore PCs and go for the one in the back, but they aren't going to be present most of the time.

I think one of your examples was evil. Well, evil doesn't equal stupid, and it would be stupid to ignore the 3 PCs who are killing you in order to attack the one doing nothing.

If the DM contrives to attack the PC, it's almost always going to be obvious that it was a contrived attack and not really the monsters having a true reason.

A monster seeing someone hiding and doing nothing should first think: ROGUE! SNEAK ATTACK! KILL KILL KILL! unless there's an insight check involved.

I often tend to have monsters even out so everyone gets attacked, unless tactics are specifically mentioned. Is that wrong, by your lights?
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
A monster seeing someone hiding and doing nothing should first think: ROGUE! SNEAK ATTACK! KILL KILL KILL! unless there's an insight check involved.

First, that's a gross over generalization. Many monsters aren't bright enough to know what a rogue is. Second, even knowing what a rogue is and being aware of abilities doesn't mean that they are going to ignore THREE other people trying to kill it in order to go run and attack a rogue who is making no effort to actually sneak towards it.

I often tend to have monsters even out so everyone gets attacked, unless tactics are specifically mentioned. Is that wrong, by your lights?

That isn't a yes or no question. It really depends on the monster. Most of the time, though, I'm not going to have a monster behave in a suicidal manner just to even out attacks.
 

Pauper

That guy, who does that thing.
But isn't that ALSO a house rule and not allowed in AL? If he's sitting at the table with a character, he has to be counted, right?

Considering that every adventure published by the AL contains the following text:

"Therefore, five categories of party strength have been created for you to use as a guide. Use these as a guide, and feel free to use a different adjustment during the adventure if the recommended party strength feels off for the group."

(taken from Suits of the Mists)

I'd say you can set the difficulty to whatever you as the DM feel is an accurate representation of the party's strength.

--
Pauper
 

KahlessNestor

Adventurer
Considering that every adventure published by the AL contains the following text:

"Therefore, five categories of party strength have been created for you to use as a guide. Use these as a guide, and feel free to use a different adjustment during the adventure if the recommended party strength feels off for the group."

(taken from Suits of the Mists)

I'd say you can set the difficulty to whatever you as the DM feel is an accurate representation of the party's strength.

--
Pauper
Okay. Never having DMed an AL session, I didn't know it was loose like that.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
 


AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Upcoming Releases

Top