Monster tactics: How do you DM's use your monsters?

[CrackedChair]

I am quite a sucker for playing out actions, and even monsters deserve a bit of in-character moments for their fighting.

Monsters in D&D do need to play out their exact way of fighting when it comes to combat, which can make a game more enjoyable. It's lore behind it as written in a Monster Manual or any other books can be utilized to play out how a monster would act in the heat of battle.

For example, Hobgoblins. These hardened soldiers adhere by strict tactics, even having a trait that allows them to deal extra damage for fighting alongside their allies, suggesting that they primarily fight in groups and support each other ally they have. What is also written, however, is their extreme hatred for elves. What this could mean is that even if there is a Human Wizard laying waste to their troops, each hobgoblin wil prioritize killing the Elf Fighter over the Wizard, due to their loathing of elves.

So DM's, how do you use your monsters when it comes to how they act in battle? Any favorites, or ones you think needs work?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Our DM seems to have "dumb" creatures attack whoever is weakest or closest.

As monster intelligence increases it is whoever hurt them badly recently.

Badies of intelligence 7 or greater seems to have a strategy be it eliminate the caster or mind control the tank.

[Unoriginal]

Monsters in D&D do need to play out their exact way of fighting when it comes to combat


No, they do not.

Monsters have some tendencies, but they're not going to have an "exact way of fighting"




So DM's, how do you use your monsters when it comes to how they act in battle? Any favorites, or ones you think needs work?

Give the opponents fitting tactical capacities. Remember which ones are likely to flee if things turn bad.

[Stale Tales]

It also depends on why the monsters are in combat. If they are guarding something they will act more defensively and if they are pillaging something more offensively. Some creatures have tactics i.e. wolves in packs. But i think we all default to "You hit me, i'm going to hit you back".

I usually gauge my players too see if they believe the monsters actions and go for that route. It's too hard trying to convince the players that a monster acts a specific way, its much easier to make that monster act the way your PCs expect... then throw in a curveball.

[Bloodcloud]

Part of the fun of DND is how much your monster behavior can adapt. To each it's own...

Some examples
Ghouls go after the easier (less armored) target. If they succeed at paralyzing, they drag and eat him. They will hit a downed character.

Wrath will try to kill one player at a time, to raise it as a specter.

Animals will flee when hurt, whenever possible.

A wizard will flee if out of spell, and will have kept a GTFO spell for the occasion. He will maximise every move.

A demon cares not about hitting allies with an AoE and will fight to the bitter end.

Kobolds will retreat constantly behind their traps in their lair, luring characters ever deeper in danger...

Golem will follow instructions to the letter, and might be kited or their programming exploited.

etc. etc. Even dumb creature should act differently acording to their nature. Otherwise, might as well play Diablo.

[Unoriginal]

A demon cares not about hitting allies with an AoE and will fight to the bitter end.


Well, summoned demons risk nothing from getting "killed" in the Material Plane. In their home planes, that's different.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I like to roleplay all my villains and chew on the scenery from time to time, including and especially in combat. They can be chatty, taunting the characters or even giving some hints as to their battle tactics when they bark orders or get increasingly frustrated or scared when their health starts failing. I give non-vocal creatures plenty of cues as to their current state of mind, like how desperate they get or when they finally think they're in over their head and start trying to run.

Only fanatics, professional soldiers, and mindless creatures willingly fight to the death in my games. The only reason I have such a high body count anyway is because a specific player is unusually bloodthirsty in every game I've ever had him in. He really hates recurring villains.

Probably because I've had him chased across something like two dozen different campaigns since we were teenagers by a multidimensional Erinyes that specifically hates him as a player. He knows his 'soul signature' and always comes up with huge, grandiose plans to kill him off. It's almost always his arrogance and love of villainous monologues that get him in the end.

[mephnick]

I try to follow flavour and intelligence.

I'll have predators attempt to drag away downed PC's to eat, they have no interest in sticking around to down more players.

I have intelligent enemies kill downed players because everyone understands healing is a thing. I have ravaging monsters kill downed players if they have multiple attacks left, they don't realize their target is unconscious after the first hit and move away.

I have groups that use pack tactics focus fire on players, ranged combatants start firing from the range of a longbow not the size of my battlemap, people that understand how magic works attempt to attack concentrating spellcasters etc etc.

People who complain it's too hard to die in 5e probably just don't play their monsters correctly.

[Specter]

This site should help. I was browsing it right now.

http://themonstersknow.com/npc-tactics-apprentice-wizards-bards-martial-arts-adepts/

[Waterdeep Merch]

This site should help. I was browsing it right now.

http://themonstersknow.com/npc-tactics-apprentice-wizards-bards-martial-arts-adepts/

This blog is an incredible resource, thanks for sharing it. I just showed it to some DM friends of mine for aid in designing their encounters.

[Sigreid]

I think the most important thing is to not meta game for the monsters.

Stupid monsters will generally go for whoever is closest. If 2 characters are equidistant they will go for either a random one or the one that hurt them the most.

Intelligent creatures should be smarter and more coordinated, but shouldn't strike optimally unless they have studied the party.

[Specter]

This blog is an incredible resource, thanks for sharing it. I just showed it to some DM friends of mine for aid in designing their encounters.

Hey, no prob.

[MrStabby]

I do have enemies fighting to the death more often than is realistic, simply to keep the game moving and to be fun. A debate about what to do with prisoners is good for RP but gets tiring after every fight. Likewise sometimes it is just nice to win a battle without having to track down survivors. Too often dealing with defeated enemies just doesn't add enough to the game to be worthwhile.

In terms of targeting I make most enemies go for the most lightly armoured party members. Anyone beyond a CR 1/4 npc is probably going to have had enough training or experience to know what kind of threats there are out there.

I also embrace the idea that npcs want to live. They will use every advantage they can - traps, ambush and so on. Nothing they do is unfair.

[Unoriginal]

I'd say that the sapient monsters fighting to the death unless they can flee is realistic.

Even neutral beings would most likely kill raiders or bandits or equivalent that surrendered, because that kind of crimes are generally punished by death. Banditry is not shoplifting, we're probably talking about people who are willing to murder people for a few copper coins and the clothes on their backs.

[ShikomeKidoMi]

I'd say that the sapient monsters fighting to the death unless they can flee is realistic.

Even neutral beings would most likely kill raiders or bandits or equivalent that surrendered, because that kind of crimes are generally punished by death. Banditry is not shoplifting, we're probably talking about people who are willing to murder people for a few copper coins and the clothes on their backs.
The feasibility of surrendering is obviously going to depend on who you're surrendering to, but yes, I expect most enemies would actually either fight to the death or try to flee (sometimes even when running away isn't going to work, if their morale breaks).

And while even the good races stand a fair chance of executing many enemies for their crimes, many of those enemies probably expect even worse. A Drow, for example, knows his people wouldn't just hang you, they'd make it slow and so has no reason to expect better for surrendering.