How smart should an enemy be to attack a downed player? [OC] /u/Whitlja DnD: Roll for Initiative!

Saw an argument/ heated discussion online as to when an enemy would focus its attacks on a downed player and thought l’d bring my contribution with a visual aid.

Please note I wouldn’t deliberately target or excessively bully one of my players with this reasoning as a DM unless it would be an apt situation!

I believe an enemy of low intelligence (such as a beast) and an enemy of high intelligence (such as a BBEG) would focus an attack on a downed player, whilst an enemy of middling intelligence would not.

My reasoning: a low intelligence beast will fight and kill on instinct, going for the weakest target AKA a downed player. Whereas a high intelligence character who follows the party and sees them pop back up and shrug off an otherwise deadly attack to any NPC, would choose to ensure nothing remains of that PC to prevent the tides from suddenly turning or to intimidate the remaining party.

On the other hand, a middling intelligence opponent who doesn’t know the party prior to combat, would just assume (reasonably) that a battle axe slash across the chest of a human plucking at a lute in the midst of battle, was enough to finish the job!

Do you have your own opinions on in game logic for attacking a downed PC?

submitted by /u/Whitlja
[link] [comments]

​r/DnD Saw an argument/ heated discussion online as to when an enemy would focus its attacks on a downed player and thought l’d bring my contribution with a visual aid. Please note I wouldn’t deliberately target or excessively bully one of my players with this reasoning as a DM unless it would be an apt situation! I believe an enemy of low intelligence (such as a beast) and an enemy of high intelligence (such as a BBEG) would focus an attack on a downed player, whilst an enemy of middling intelligence would not. My reasoning: a low intelligence beast will fight and kill on instinct, going for the weakest target AKA a downed player. Whereas a high intelligence character who follows the party and sees them pop back up and shrug off an otherwise deadly attack to any NPC, would choose to ensure nothing remains of that PC to prevent the tides from suddenly turning or to intimidate the remaining party. On the other hand, a middling intelligence opponent who doesn’t know the party prior to combat, would just assume (reasonably) that a battle axe slash across the chest of a human plucking at a lute in the midst of battle, was enough to finish the job! Do you have your own opinions on in game logic for attacking a downed PC? submitted by /u/Whitlja [link] [comments] 

Saw an argument/ heated discussion online as to when an enemy would focus its attacks on a downed player and thought l’d bring my contribution with a visual aid.

Please note I wouldn’t deliberately target or excessively bully one of my players with this reasoning as a DM unless it would be an apt situation!

I believe an enemy of low intelligence (such as a beast) and an enemy of high intelligence (such as a BBEG) would focus an attack on a downed player, whilst an enemy of middling intelligence would not.

My reasoning: a low intelligence beast will fight and kill on instinct, going for the weakest target AKA a downed player. Whereas a high intelligence character who follows the party and sees them pop back up and shrug off an otherwise deadly attack to any NPC, would choose to ensure nothing remains of that PC to prevent the tides from suddenly turning or to intimidate the remaining party.

On the other hand, a middling intelligence opponent who doesn’t know the party prior to combat, would just assume (reasonably) that a battle axe slash across the chest of a human plucking at a lute in the midst of battle, was enough to finish the job!

Do you have your own opinions on in game logic for attacking a downed PC?

submitted by /u/Whitlja
[link] [comments] 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *