Community

Dev Vim wrote:

Aggro is just an AI component used because you can't have a person controlling every monster, and its very simplistic to save on coding so that they dont bog down the game.

I'd have to disagree. Aggro and aggro management was designed to enhance the gameplay of the MMO, and to solidify the gameplay of the 4 roles, the same 4 roles that 4e will be using. Lots of games use different sorts of AI algorithms to decide what to attack. Aggro is not just a lazy AI algorithm; it's a game mechanic that is purposely made transparent to the player, with a host of abilities for them to play the "aggro management game" while in combat. Whether or not you find it fun is somewhat aside from the point.

If your DM is not smart enough to manage something that basic, he should not be a DM.

As I said earlier though, most of the DM's creatures, either roleplayed or powergamed, would almost always choose to NOT attack the tank. Aggro/taunt was put into MMO's to solidify the tank's gameplay purpose.

Dev Vim wrote:

Aggro is an AI mechanic, if you want to argue Ill find a text book and dig up a quote.

An AI mechanic is still a game mechanic. Just because it's a machine doing it doesn't make it any less useful.

Its just alot better for a DM to say "ok this person is closest to this one, its a goblin, it'll hit that person" Its not hard to decide who it is that attacks who, any Aggro rules are put into MMO's because the computer dosent know who to attack otherwise. Its simply a term for the very simplistic AI that you have to use on a massive scale because the computers need some form of instructions.

Nobody is saying we use computers to decide how to attack. What people are saying is that it's a good idea to have a set of rules and guidelines on how monsters pick their targets based on a set of believable in-game factors.

I am sorry if I sound harsh, but frankly There is no benefit to any 'aggro' system. its another layer of complexity that makes you have to decide who will attack what when chances are unless they are fairly cunning They are going to go for the closest threat in full on melee.

I am sorry if I sound harsh, but you're doing nothing but prove that you're an anti-MMOG fanatic without a shred of rationality whatsoever. You are not contributing anything useful to the discussion.

Dev Vim wrote:

I contributed the same thing most of the people did "its alot more realistic and alot quicker to just have the DM adjudicate, and the reason they have the AI in there is because you can't have a person controlling everything for every person in every fight on a server"

And again, the fact that it's controlled by the AI is NOT the issue. It's the *algorithm* and the *mechanics* behind the AI's decision-making is what CAN be adopted into an RPG.

You just refuse to listen.

That is a fact, live with it.

It's a fact that you apparently have no idea that a mechanic used by an AI can be used by a DM.

Tell you what, if you can come up with an aggro system for D&D that doesn't muddle the game up and that provides something you can't just house rule with a bluff check or the Knight class, then I will apologize, but frankly I think you just don't like me, and thats your whole issue.

A challenge? Sure.

Here's a fairly simple aggro system:

Say you want an aggro system based on unintelligent creatures having a specific anger towards specific types of classes, items, or races.

For instance, say we've got an Ooze creature that is naturally inclined to attack creatures that are magical or have lots of magic on them. Let's call it a Magic-Consuming Ooze (for the purpose of simplicity).

Would it be realistic for the DM to have it choose a target intelligently based on the tactical situation? Or would it be more realistic that it acts on its instinct? I would say the latter is more realistic because it's an Ooze and it has no brains.

For the Magic-Consuming Ooze, we can have a system that you get points of aggro depending on the following factors:

5 points for Wizards, Sorcs, or other arcane caster classes
3 points for Clerics, Favored Souls, and other divine caster classes (it likes arcane magics more)
1 point for every magic item on the character
10 points if the creature is magical
-1 point for every space between you and the ooze (it's lazy and prefers closer targets)

And so on.

What you do then is to add up the points, maybe roll a dice and add the result for some randomness, and the character with the highest score gets to be the Ooze's target.

Of course, this system is still clunky and will need streamlining, but at its heart it is the same aggro system used by MMOG AIs.

Dev Vim wrote:

Fine, you now have a home brew system for aggro, but personally I don't understand why you would ever use it. Why not just say the mindless ooze goes for the first viable target possible,

Define "viable".

And let me tell you now that the way you define it is an aggro mechanic in itself.

Dev Vim wrote:

Viable as in not something redundant.

No, no. You said "Why doesn't the ooze just attack the first viable target"

Define how do you pick a "viable target."

Go ahead.

Once you do, you've created your own aggro mechanic.