[DM]: How is "aggro" or "threat" handled? (3.5)

[killem2]

In the thank build thread just a few links down, the words aggro and threat are thrown around. These are traits I am familiar with from online games such as World of Warcraft or Dungeons and Dragons Online, but how exactly does that translate to D&D?

What exactly does my Fighter in my group keep targets on him rather than just walking away and attacking my wizard or ranger?

[Gavinfoxx]

Well, the idea is to present the main clear and present danger that needs to be dealt with RIGHT NOW or else.

Alternately, the character can simply prevent enemies from moving to engage squishy bits by battlefield control that simply negates their ability to move in the first place.

[Jopustopin]

Pretty much Attacks of Opportunity are used to keep aggro. Anything that gives you more of them or extends the reach at which you threaten will cause you to "hold aggro."

Otherwise, no there really isn't. Monsters generally go after the biggest threat and many of them know that's the weak looking wizard in the background.

[Frosty]

In the thank build thread just a few links down, the words aggro and threat are thrown around. These are traits I am familiar with from online games such as World of Warcraft or Dungeons and Dragons Online, but how exactly does that translate to D&D?

What exactly does my Fighter in my group keep targets on him rather than just walking away and attacking my wizard or ranger?
Intimidate might give roleplay-reasons, if you can make yourself seem scarier. Otherwise, use AoOs in conunction with maneuvers/abilities that halt movement (like Trip or Grapple) in order to physically stop enemies who try to walk by. That's pretty much the only ways for a Fighter. The Knight class (from PHB2) actually has an aggro-mechanic, an area-of-effect Will-Save or only attack me ability.

Also, note that the wizard can take care of himself. He's less likely to die than you are anyways past level 5 or so.

[JoeYounger]

There are a few feats like Goad that I've used in the past, that causes them to make a will save or be unable to melee anyone but me. Or Crusader gets a stance that gives the bad guy a -4 to hit any ally while I threaten him and the text says he knows about the penalty, so that should "urge" the baddy to target the tank.

[killem2]

Oh I get it, if they confront the fighter (who naturally should be up front), if they try and leave the threat area of the fighter, to say go after that wizard, they risk, getting hit by an AoO, and thus, might want to hang around.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

The easiest way is if the fighter has combat reflexes, improved trip, and a reach weapon such as a spiked chain. He places himself between the opponents and the softer party members, and the opponents have little chance of reaching those characters so they may as well engage the fighter first.

[killem2]

Got it, its a much more "active" process of keeping threat, rather than just a number that keeps them attached to you under games rules.

[HunterOfJello]

Depends on the monster or enemy. Every npc has to have their decision processes analyzed separately.

If you read monster entries or read through a few different modules you can get an idea of how the different designers imagined different enemies acting during fights. A halfling rogue might immediately target the wizard of a party. A female half-orc fighter might have a hatred of weak men and therefore try to kill the male rogue in the party. A hobgoblin warblade might want to test his melee prowess and go straight after the strongest looking member of the party by charging right at them.

Each enemy acts differently. It's up to you to analyze the psychology of each npc and decide how you think they should react to the scenarios that are playing out. Tarasques, mind flayers, ogres, kobolds, and succubi all act differently in combat and take actions based on their own motives. Some enemies will change their target if they get hurt badly by someone, others will attack anyone who they notice casting healing spells, and some will completely ignore any actions going on and just keep attacking the first person they decided to go after. The game is designed to be much more complex and diverse than any simple threat/aggro system.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Correct, the only thing determining the actions of the monsters in the game world is DM adjudication (and sometimes the players if they use their abilities in certain ways). A big dumb vermin will likely just attack the nearest target, while a mad cultist of Hextor might target the Cleric of Heironeous first no matter what, and a more intelligent enemy may just "geek the mage" from afar.

More direct aggro mechanics include the afforementioned Goad and some Knight class features.

[sonofzeal]

Goad (feat), Knight's Challenge (knight class feature), and a smattering of Enchantment spells are the only things I know of for this.

DDO, the D&D mmorpg, lets characters use Intimidate and Diplomacy to modify aggro. Intimidate increases it, Diplomacy reduces it. I'd be fine allowing this at my table, against non-mindless enemies.

[Fax Celestis]

What exactly does my Fighter in my group keep targets on him rather than just walking away and attacking my wizard or ranger?
Nothing.

Truly and honestly.

There are only two features, to my knowledge, that actually force creatures to attack you: Knight 4's Test of Mettle ability, and the Goad feat. Well, and Iron Guard's Glare as a very minor aggro pull.

[Ernir]

The lack of a proper, generalized aggro mechanic is one of the major flaws with 3.5 melee, IMO... what you're reading about here are basically patches.

[Jopustopin]

The lack of a proper, generalized aggro mechanic is one of the major flaws with 3.5 melee, IMO... what you're reading about here are basically patches.

I disagree. Aggro is a way for programmers to make an extremely dumbed down version of an "artificial intelligence." Seriously worst mechanic in an MMO IMO. It makes farming mobs boring and tedious and raids even more boring and tedius. It's why PvP is all the rage in MMO's now, because aggro is a dumb concept for lazy AI programmers.

[Frosty]

Oh I get it, if they confront the fighter (who naturally should be up front), if they try and leave the threat area of the fighter, to say go after that wizard, they risk, getting hit by an AoO, and thus, might want to hang around.

Don't forget that sometimes an enemy would rather eat an AoO because standing in front of a Fighter means eating a Full-Attack.

[The Glyphstone]

Nothing.

Truly and honestly.

There are only two features, to my knowledge, that actually force creatures to attack you: Knight 4's Test of Mettle ability, and the Goad feat. Well, and Iron Guard's Glare as a very minor aggro pull.

Well, Defensive Rebuke as well, though that functions more like a 4E Mark.

[Fax Celestis]

I disagree. Aggro is a way for programmers to make an extremely dumbed down version of an "artificial intelligence."

That's sort of the opposite of what aggro does. An intelligent monster would go around the defenders and squish the glass cannons: aggro mechanics allow defenders to do their job, especially in a turn-based game.

[Lapak]

That's sort of the opposite of what aggro does. An intelligent monster would go around the defenders and squish the glass cannons: aggro mechanics allow defenders to do their job, especially in a turn-based game.That's why he said 'extremely dumbed-down.'

The Achilles heel of defenders in D&D has more to do with the mechanics of turn-based movement and line-of-sight than an aggro mechanic (or lack thereof.) Every enemy with an INT score higher than 3 would recognize that it's a good idea to kill the unarmored target throwing fire around first just to cut down on enemy numbers if for no other reason. In a 'real' fight the warrior could step in front of an enemy, either to keep him away from the wizard or to literally block their view of him, but that's just not possible with D&D combat - and that's the real problem. Which is why the mechanics that do work are the ones that interfere with movement, like tripping or treating spaces as difficult terrain. What's missing is the ability for a wizard to actually hide behind the fighter. :smalltongue:

[IdleMuse]

Several people have mentioned it already, but I'll add my voice to Iron Guard's Glare as a useful method of achieving this; -4 is a big penalty, and it does show. I played a Duergar in a psionics campaign once who used this (via feat), and Expansion + Reach weapon to effectively apply the penalty to the entire encounter. Combo this with some major Initimidate/fear optimisation (that skill trick maybe?), really start lowering the opponents to-hit, and they're really starting to miss pretty frequently. I suppose this really fits into more of a debuff niche than an aggro-holding one, but it mostly worked.

[deuxhero]

Nothing.

Truly and honestly.

There are only two features, to my knowledge, that actually force creatures to attack you: Knight 4's Test of Mettle ability, and the Goad feat. Well, and Iron Guard's Glare as a very minor aggro pull.

Stand Still feat makes them unable to move if you use it against them getting away.

Given there are about 100 differing ways to avoid an AoO entirely though...

[Ernir]

I disagree. Aggro is a way for programmers to make an extremely dumbed down version of an "artificial intelligence." Seriously worst mechanic in an MMO IMO. It makes farming mobs boring and tedious and raids even more boring and tedius. It's why PvP is all the rage in MMO's now, because aggro is a dumb concept for lazy AI programmers.

"Pulling aggro" is a way to force the opposition to make suboptimal choices in target acquisition. Of course it's dumb! :smalltongue:

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

That's sort of the opposite of what aggro does. An intelligent monster would go around the defenders and squish the glass cannons: aggro mechanics allow defenders to do their job, especially in a turn-based game.Nah, aggro mechanics are just another "patch," and can be just as ineffective or stupid as the other patches. The reason a monster in D&D wouldn't just run past the tank and geek the mage is that the tank would stab him repeatedly, not that the monster is just stupid or easily goaded. This is why I prefer maximizing the reliability and effectiveness of my tanks' AoOs with size, reach and Thicket of Blades.

[The_Admiral]

Like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V7zbWNznbs) :smallbiggrin:

[Urpriest]

Like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V7zbWNznbs) :smallbiggrin:

Oddly enough, I thought that was going to be Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit.

[Fax Celestis]

That's why he said 'extremely dumbed-down.'

The Achilles heel of defenders in D&D has more to do with the mechanics of turn-based movement and line-of-sight than an aggro mechanic (or lack thereof.) Every enemy with an INT score higher than 3 would recognize that it's a good idea to kill the unarmored target throwing fire around first just to cut down on enemy numbers if for no other reason. In a 'real' fight the warrior could step in front of an enemy, either to keep him away from the wizard or to literally block their view of him, but that's just not possible with D&D combat - and that's the real problem. Which is why the mechanics that do work are the ones that interfere with movement, like tripping or treating spaces as difficult terrain. What's missing is the ability for a wizard to actually hide behind the fighter. :smalltongue:


Nah, aggro mechanics are just another "patch," and can be just as ineffective or stupid as the other patches. The reason a monster in D&D wouldn't just run past the tank and geek the mage is that the tank would stab him repeatedly, not that the monster is just stupid or easily goaded. This is why I prefer maximizing the reliability and effectiveness of my tanks' AoOs with size, reach and Thicket of Blades.

My question to both of you is this: if a defender-type could move as an immediate action (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172606), would that help?

[Hiro Protagonest]

Oddly enough, I thought that was going to be Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit.

How would that fit?

[Seerow]

Nah, aggro mechanics are just another "patch," and can be just as ineffective or stupid as the other patches. The reason a monster in D&D wouldn't just run past the tank and geek the mage is that the tank would stab him repeatedly, not that the monster is just stupid or easily goaded. This is why I prefer maximizing the reliability and effectiveness of my tanks' AoOs with size, reach and Thicket of Blades.

This is why I actually like 4e's mark mechanics. In addition to debuffing the enemy when it ignores them, it typically comes along with the tank getting lots of extra damage when he's ignored, so it's basically "Attack the tank or he will chew you up and spit you out".

[Psyren]

Nah, aggro mechanics are just another "patch," and can be just as ineffective or stupid as the other patches. The reason a monster in D&D wouldn't just run past the tank and geek the mage is that the tank would stab him repeatedly, not that the monster is just stupid or easily goaded. This is why I prefer maximizing the reliability and effectiveness of my tanks' AoOs with size, reach and Thicket of Blades.

Note that none of these help you against a burrowing or teleporting foe, and you need special equipment/buffs to deal with an incorporeal one. Not to mention midair or underwater fights...

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Note that none of these help you against a burrowing or teleporting foe, and you need special equipment/buffs to deal with an incorporeal one. Not to mention midair or underwater fights...Burrow --> Fly. Fly or Underwater --> Moar reach, and get squishie closer to you. Teleportation --> Anticipate Teleportation. Incorporeal --> like you said, special equipment.

Yeah, I know that the casters are doing those counters. Melee isn't going to cover anything, but that's not a problem aggro mechanics can solve. Also, some encounters are supposed to subvert the "Meat shield stands in front" idea (incorporeals are a good example).

[Knaight]

That's sort of the opposite of what aggro does. An intelligent monster would go around the defenders and squish the glass cannons: aggro mechanics allow defenders to do their job, especially in a turn-based game.

Actual mobility does this better. Say, hypothetically, one was able to move on turns not their own, in a declared pattern. Suddenly, you get "Corwin Whiteblade stays between the monsters and the magus", and when the monster in question moves he moves with them as a reaction. I'm not saying just having movement as an immediate action, rather than the strict turn order breaks some. Granted, it would work even better if D&D would incorporate something equivalent to FATE zones, but that would be fairly difficult to integrate in the system unless it was put there from the start.

[Snowbluff]

$ things to keep in mind:
The Goad feat.
Who is a threat.
Who is actively taunting/annoying the creature (Players RP this).
Monster behaviors (Ambush Drakes will try to attack slowed enemies, etc, etc.)

When I can't use any of those, I roll a die.

[Psyren]

Yeah, I know that the casters are doing those counters.

Yeah, you made my counterpoint for me.


Melee isn't going to cover anything, but that's not a problem aggro mechanics can solve.

Honestly, I think "aggro" is a pointless mechanic against anything with Int above 3 anyway. I'm fine with making it painful (even extremely painful) for an enemy to attack a target that you don't want it to, but it should always have the option to pursue that high-risk, high-reward strategy of potentially taking the glass cannons or "God" out of commission.

[Frosty]

This is why you give your Monk a fake staff and fancy-looking robe, and have him chant non-sense. Hey, the Monk's all-good saves are worth SOMETHING in this situation!

[Taelas]

As a concept, aggro makes perfect sense: If you have aggro, you are the biggest perceived threat on the battlefield.

Unfortunately, this tends to mean the one in the dress, and most certainly not the guy built to actually take your attacks.

Enter the threat mechanic, which is what is actually dumb. It is also necessary to allow defense-based characters to take the attacks as opposed to the glass cannons.

[Mnemnosyne]

My question to both of you is this: if a defender-type could move as an immediate action (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172606), would that help?
I think some form of this would definitely be helpful. I hate the concept of an 'aggro' mechanic (other than an actual spell, but if you can land an enchantment spell on the enemy, just dominate them or something, durr) because it makes no sense, but the way melee types are supposed to protect the mages is by physically interposing themselves, so something along these lines is helpful.

The trouble with this seems to have come about in 3rd edition when the movement system was precisely codified and made on a grid - in 2nd Edition, the fighter would just say 'okay, I stand in front and when they come, I block their path' and that would work. The enemy would have to do *something* to knock the fighter out of the way, because he would physically interpose himself between the enemy and the guy he's protecting.

However, dealing with the rules as they currently are, there are some methods for fighter types to control the enemy's movement pretty effectively. Stand Still, Thicket of Blades, and Combat Reflexes, especially if combined with a weapon like a spiked chain, make it so the enemy can't get past you at all. That's actually the only totally effective method (at least, totally effective as long as you don't miss, and until you run out of AoO's for that round) I can think of off the top of my head. It's pretty effective though, since stand still means the enemy's move action is gone, so they're stuck in the first square they entered your threat range. In a 10 to 15 foot wide hallway, that means you only need 2-3 attacks of opportunity...assuming you hit with all of them.

[Gwendol]

Actually; combining test of mettle with intimidation tactics will probably prove to be the most efficient when it comes to locking down the enemy. Dreadful Wrath might be the feat of choice here, or a way to get frightful presence (like dragons).

And while the methods for drawing the attention of the enemy are weak, to say the least, if playing Knight you also have the Bulwark of Defence ability, which will synergize with the mind affecting abilities nicely. For a tactically minded group this can be quite useful at times.

[Mnemnosyne]

It seems to me that Test of Mettle is pretty much worthless. DC of 10 + 1/2 class level + charisma will save that only works on creatures with language and an int score of 5 or higher, plus it only lasts 5 rounds and can't affect that target again. Also, it requires you to be a straight Knight to get even a halfway decent save on it. Oh, and it's only usable 1/2 class levels + charisma times per day - and that's if you save ALL knight's challenge uses for Test of Mettle instead of some of the other abilities.

I suppose you could crank that Charisma bonus up pretty high by dipping Marshal or something, but the fact that it's a will save and could even be argued to be mind-affecting and therefore blocked by immunity to mind-affecting still makes it far less reliable than just using Stand Still.

[molten_dragon]

As several people have already mentioned, D&D doesn't have much of an 'aggro' mechanic (at least not in the way that it's used in MMOs). The only things that really qualify are the Goad feat, Knight's Challenge, and possibly the crusader stance that gives a rather large to-hit penalty to any opponents that don't attack the crusader. That's about it though.

[Gwendol]

It seems to me that Test of Mettle is pretty much worthless.

At the level you get it it is not. It is a tool that works sometimes, and works better if you prepare and plan for it. Here's an actual situation when it was used: Party comes across a goblin warband pillaging a sacked elven village. About 60-100 goblins. The party scout identifies some leader/shaman types and the plan is to draw the attention of the mooks, while the scout (druid) blitzes the shaman. The knight (4) is enlarged and buffed before making his presence known and issue the ToM, drawing the ire of most of the mooks.

The rest of the party were hidden, and helped the knight through flanking (mostly magical) attacks, while the druid could blitz the leaders rather unhindered.

I'd say this is a situation when it would work quite well. Against undead of course the tactic would have to be different.

[some guy]

I think some form of this would definitely be helpful. I hate the concept of an 'aggro' mechanic (other than an actual spell, but if you can land an enchantment spell on the enemy, just dominate them or something, durr) because it makes no sense, but the way melee types are supposed to protect the mages is by physically interposing themselves, so something along these lines is helpful.

The trouble with this seems to have come about in 3rd edition when the movement system was precisely codified and made on a grid - in 2nd Edition, the fighter would just say 'okay, I stand in front and when they come, I block their path' and that would work. The enemy would have to do *something* to knock the fighter out of the way, because he would physically interpose himself between the enemy and the guy he's protecting.

However, dealing with the rules as they currently are, there are some methods for fighter types to control the enemy's movement pretty effectively. Stand Still, Thicket of Blades, and Combat Reflexes, especially if combined with a weapon like a spiked chain, make it so the enemy can't get past you at all. That's actually the only totally effective method (at least, totally effective as long as you don't miss, and until you run out of AoO's for that round) I can think of off the top of my head. It's pretty effective though, since stand still means the enemy's move action is gone, so they're stuck in the first square they entered your threat range. In a 10 to 15 foot wide hallway, that means you only need 2-3 attacks of opportunity...assuming you hit with all of them.

Hm, maybe a readied action could help here, as well.

[Lapak]

My question to both of you is this: if a defender-type could move as an immediate action (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172606), would that help?Indeed. Guardianship and Interposition from your link are the kinds of things I'm talking about. Definitely a step in the right direction! That said...

The trouble with this seems to have come about in 3rd edition when the movement system was precisely codified and made on a grid - in 2nd Edition, the fighter would just say 'okay, I stand in front and when they come, I block their path' and that would work. The enemy would have to do *something* to knock the fighter out of the way, because he would physically interpose himself between the enemy and the guy he's protecting.

However, dealing with the rules as they currently are, there are some methods for fighter types to control the enemy's movement pretty effectively. Stand Still, Thicket of Blades, and Combat Reflexes, especially if combined with a weapon like a spiked chain, make it so the enemy can't get past you at all. That's actually the only totally effective method (at least, totally effective as long as you don't miss, and until you run out of AoO's for that round) I can think of off the top of my head. It's pretty effective though, since stand still means the enemy's move action is gone, so they're stuck in the first square they entered your threat range. In a 10 to 15 foot wide hallway, that means you only need 2-3 attacks of opportunity...assuming you hit with all of them.As Mnemnosyne kind of gets at in his post, there's still a weirdness in the rules in that when it's their 'turn' a monster can just roll right around a defender who is otherwise unoccupied in any open space.

Fax's suggestion is a good one to deal with one part of the problem. Mnemnosyne's build elements are a good suggestion to deal with another. But the essential problem I have is that you need to specifically construct around such a build to perform such a basic task. We're talking about two feats and a martial stance, plus maybe one of Fax's prowess-based feats, to do something that almost literally anybody plucked off the street can do in real life: "Stand here. If someone tries to walk past you, stand in front of them and don't let them go by without a fight."

It's not the end of the world or anything, it's just odd.

[darkdragoon]

There are quite a few defensive prestige classes but most of them are extremely limited.


Of course, there are a ton of spells that put barriers or compel enemies.
Somewhat ironic in that Sorcerers and Warlocks can get things like Aura of Menace and yet they probably won't bother.

[ericgrau]

Three ways:
1. The squishies aren't very squishy. The cleric is more like a WoW paladin than a priest, the rogue has so-so defense and the clothy has defensive spells (though #2 is often enough, see below). Conversely the tank isn't very tanky, and often you need HP and AC merely to protect yourself.
2. Attacks of opportunity, full attacks and 3-5 round fights. In WoW you make 100 attacks before the fight is over and moving to the clothy is no big deal. In D&D if you try to move to the back line it is painfully slow and/or has a backlash effect.
3. There are splatbooks with more specific tanking mechanisms, I'm sure a lot are getting mentioned here. But often these aren't essential. In core there are tripping and reach weapons too to keep enemy movement locked down.

I think WoW thinking is common but dangerous in D&D and leads people to either focus AC & HP to the exclusion of offense or they realize that's useless so they ignore 1 & 2 completely and dump defense on their front line which gets them killed. Or threads like these tend to focus too much on #3. In fact the melee should be both major damage dealers and high defense.

[Tyndmyr]

Ready an action to move in front of them? That should stop a charge pretty hard, unless they can bull rush over you.

It's not as reliable as the combos above, but it is a pretty reasonable simulation of reality, and low on the investment.

[Fax Celestis]

Ready an action to move in front of them? That should stop a charge pretty hard, unless they can bull rush over you.

It's not as reliable as the combos above, but it is a pretty reasonable simulation of reality, and low on the investment.

Readying is a pretty shoddy mechanic.


Ready

The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so).

Readying an Action

You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.

You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don’t otherwise move any distance during the round.

You can spend your standard to ready a move or a free action. Yeehaw. Standard for standard isn't bad, but good luck readying a full-round action, a swift action, or doing anything meaningful with your movement when you ready it. ("He moved but doesn't have his standard? I go around.") Plus, your init changes (which may or may not be good), and you can flub a ready by prepping for an action that doesn't come, effectively saying, "I'm going to twiddle my thumbs/polish my ranseur this round."

[Tyndmyr]

Around kills the charge. Depending on distance and situation, it may also not be possible to still move and attack.

It's not flawless, I'll grant you, but if you want to move to block...you can do so. It's not optimal from the standpoint of getting the most damage, but that's fairly realistic. The guy worrying about guarding the mage is probably not getting the same kill count as the guy attacking with abandon.

AoOs are also a fairly realistic means of discouraging movement. They become especially effective when you have multiple front liners. One of my current groups has three people up front with a fair bit of strength. One of those has Combat Reflexes and Cleave(neither of which are that obscure). Depending on situation, going for the mage is often really impractical for melee bad guys.

[Bovine Colonel]

I personally think TF2 models mechanics like this well in basic strategy.

Basically, if you don't attack the Heavy, the Heavy shreds you. So you'd build for pure undiluted damage while still keeping reasonable HP and AC.

[Endarire]

I played a Warforged Crusader specced to take a hit.

At level 1 I went from full to KO (maybe dead) in one hit because tanking in 3.5 doesn't work. People generally can't take a hit, even if they're specced for it. (Avoiding hits, acting out of turn, and wasting enemy actions is 'tanking.')

And in 3.5, often the "squishies" the "meat shields" are trying to protect have the best defenses. Sometimes, the defendees make better "defenders!"

[Hiro Protagonest]

At level 1 I went from full to KO (maybe dead) in one hit because tanking in 3.5 doesn't work.

Uh, no. You went from full to KO in one hit because you were playing at the level where a commoner with a scythe is deadly.

[The Glyphstone]

I played a Warforged Crusader specced to take a hit.

At level 1 I went from full to KO (maybe dead) in one hit because tanking in 3.5 doesn't work. People generally can't take a hit, even if they're specced for it. (Avoiding hits, acting out of turn, and wasting enemy actions is 'tanking.')

And in 3.5, often the "squishies" the "meat shields" are trying to protect have the best defenses. Sometimes, the defendees make better "defenders!"

That's because you were level 1, not because you were bad at taking hits. Low single-digit levels are infamous for oneshots going out in every direction.

EDIT: Swordsaged.

[Endarire]

I've played higher levels. I once was a Wizard5 with mage armor, shield, and alter self. I had about 30 AC, the highest in the party. Shield also negated enemy magic missiles, which the DM was fond of.

I jokingly called out, "Mage tank!" Then the Druid took over. And my Hood (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872838/Little_Red_Raiding_Hood_A_Tale_of_38_Guide_to_the_ 35_Dragoon) cohort moreso.

[Frosty]

Did you usually spend the first 2 rounds of combat buffing yourself? Mage Armor can be up all the time, but Shield and Alter Self...not so much.

[LordBlades]

Did you usually spend the first 2 rounds of combat buffing yourself? Mage Armor can be up all the time, but Shield and Alter Self...not so much.

Alter Self is 10 min/level. Coupled with a Lesser Rod of Extend (3000 gp) that's 100 minutes duration for a 5th level wizard.

An outsider wizard (ab)using Dwarf Ancestor as Alter Self form and Scintillating Scales if needed is a very scary tank at level 5-6.

[Tokiko Mima]

If monsters want to attack the person throwing around fire, why fight the status quo? That's why I've always preferred a level (or more) of Dragonfire Adept + Entangling Exhalation feat for all my D&D tank/taunting and aggro needs. For a bonus, glamer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicArmor.htm#glamered) up your armor so it looks like you're wearing robes. :smalltongue:

[Killer Angel]

As several people have already mentioned, D&D doesn't have much of an 'aggro' mechanic (at least not in the way that it's used in MMOs). The only things that really qualify are the Goad feat, Knight's Challenge, and possibly the crusader stance that gives a rather large to-hit penalty to any opponents that don't attack the crusader. That's about it though.

You can work around it, and approach the thing from a different angle.
step 1: Built a ubercharger.
step 2: one-shot enemy A in the first round.
Step 3: enemy B will attack you, 'cause it won't risk to let you repeat the charge against him

Basically, you have to show that you're a credible and immediate threat.

[killem2]

I think WoW thinking is common but dangerous in D&D and leads people to either focus AC & HP to the exclusion of offense or they realize that's useless so they ignore 1 & 2 completely and dump defense on their front line which gets them killed. Or threads like these tend to focus too much on #3. In fact the melee should be both major damage dealers and high defense.

I'm not focused on anything, or really linking d&d to wow at all. I just noticed it being mentioned quite often in that other thread, and as a new DM, I just wanted to make sure it wasn't a mechanic I was overlooking.

[Frosty]

Alter Self is 10 min/level. Coupled with a Lesser Rod of Extend (3000 gp) that's 100 minutes duration for a 5th level wizard.

An outsider wizard (ab)using Dwarf Ancestor as Alter Self form and Scintillating Scales if needed is a very scary tank at level 5-6.
You're not guaranteed to have a lesser rod of extend by that level, and not every wizard is an outsider. It's simply not expedient to have Alter Self up for the entire adventuring day. I mean, even with a rod of extend, you'd probably need to dedicate ALL of your 2nd level spell slots to have it up all day.

[LordBlades]

You're not guaranteed to have a lesser rod of extend by that level, and not every wizard is an outsider. It's simply not expedient to have Alter Self up for the entire adventuring day. I mean, even with a rod of extend, you'd probably need to dedicate ALL of your 2nd level spell slots to have it up all day.

Depends on how long your adventuring day is and if in your campaign it's the party going after the monsters, or the monsters coming after you. 3-4 hours is more than enough to clear the average dungeon. As for the rod of extend, it depends on your campaign as well but if you have magic marts there's little reason not to have one for this kind of build.