I think it's easier for Clerics: Wear Medium Armor, have 14 Dex, cast Concentration Spells (probably Spiritual Guardian), scream "I am Concentrating on a spell, if you lads dont break mine, u r all screwed!" than do Dodge action as if your life is depend on it.
@@NoBrakes23 Still in combat, attackers need to make a save to be able to target you. If they fail, they have to change targets, potentially forfeiting attack.
tools I've used to generate aggro as a paladin in 5e: strong opportunity attacks via smite or warcaster - conditioning the dm to avoid provoking opp attacks from me via smites can go a long way. maintaining concentration on aoe party buffs like bless. calling the enemies' attention in character (and the dm's attention out of character) to my defensive auras. impairing enemy mobility via crown or, especially, conquest aura. straight up role playing. paladins are charismatic, play them with big, hard to ignore personalities. insult enemies, challenge them, appeal to them. dms will often play along.
I use sentinel, and my DM has caught on that if it's my turn I usually don't smite unless it's a crit or we are fighting something super scary, but if I'm hitting them with an attack of opportunity I'm smiting the crap out of them.
I'm always confused when the subject of "tanking mechanics" comes up in D&D, because it's very simple: *To gain aggro in D&D, you don't taunt the creature, you taunt the DM.*
There is one way I have been able to often "win" aggro as a player, and that is by just taunting the monsters. Whenever you are making an attack you can freely narrate it in any way you want, and time and time again I have met with enemies that were willing to focus me for acting like an absolute bully. Like, when I make an attack against an animal, I also bash my shield with my weapon menacingly and kick dust in its direction. When I attack a humanoid, I also mock them, spit in their face or so. And don't even get me started on how vain dragons are willing to attack the person that calls them an overgrown iguana with bad breath. Doesn't work all the time but it does sometimes and it certainly makes fights more flavorful too.
When attacking Fiends, Demons, and Devils, I like to suggest that they have Celestial ancestry or are guilty of doing good deeds when no one is looking. The DM usually plays along.
A good DM plays along, yeah. Another thing to do against particularly monstrous, bloodthirsty enemies is something dramatic like biting a finger so hard it bleeds. This makes for cool moments and often works!
Another point is that enemies might have certain meta-knowledge about how their world works and understand how dangerous/powerful certain classes and characters are relative to others. While the typical goblin or ooze wouldn't, maybe an highly experienced knight or a scheming devil would target knows the problems casters can cause and makes sure to take care of them first.
And know how to take care of them. AND actually have access to the tools to do so? So many questions like this guide more natural and easier to choose npc motive/actions.
@@larkohiya Yes. Even in TM's "open field vs orcs" example, my first thought was that 1/2 of the orcs would surround the front liner, while the other 1/2 would move E S-E towards the players back line, ranged attacking on the way to draw the players out. As a DM, I play my orcs as tactically sound hit-and-run merc units; they need to be represented with some cunning to communicate the threat level they impose imo.
@@pranakhan a lot of the how and why isn't super detailed in mechanical form on a lot of popular media formats. Most things theater of the mind it or keep engagements smaller affairs because the table is doing loose dice rolling (not using automated systems, not using the standard damage for mobs, not being prepared and wasting time checking notes) which eats up a lot of the time that otherwise would actually challenge parties in ways the number crunch of the system actually works well within.
14:00 yes, yes they are, at least every time when I'm DMing. The orc "Aggressive" monster trait is absolutely made to create combat scenarios were they charge directly into the rearguard. Three of those orcs can actually engage in melee at least one of the other characters.
This is a great video. I don't know about you guys, but it's so interesting when you have the chance to be DM and player on weekly games. Since I'm a player, I understand how players approach encounters, the same as being a DM. The one thing I dislike is that I overthink everything and end up making up a strategy for every PC, NPC and monster in the battlefield, so I get a "little bit" frustrated when people take too long in their turns or if they don't use any strategy at all. It's a blessing and a curse. One thing that I've had a hard time explaining to some players is that D&D isn't a videogame. A monster with decent Int or Wis isn't going to act like a Skyrim enemy: "oh, it must have been the wind" when they get hit by a hidden PC or "oh, this guy is the - tank - , of course everyone is going to waste their attacks on this one enemy and let the other 4 kill them with ranged attacks". A little bit of a rant lol. Sorry.
Yeah, that's something that my players love and hate about my encounters: they know NPCs react like living beings, so the PCs do all manner of creative stunts to draw focus and manipulate foes. A few times new players have thought it would be like Skyrim NPCs, but I typically have at least 1 experienced player that can help them by example of how they can interact with characters like real creatures, be they friend or foe. Role play is rewarded, allowing players to deceive, fluster, or enrage foes through their words and actions. My party actually manipulated some yetis the other day by doing this: the enemies were above them on a cliff tossing rocks, so the party mounted the head of a packmate they had slain earlier onto a pike and flaunted it. This enraged them so much the rest of the pack jumped down and attacked the one with the pike all at once, making for a dangerous encounter but allowing the party to dispatch their foes. It's nice having more "realistic" NPCs as it also can work to spice up combat: for example, zombies are usually mindless drones that attack whatever's closest, which isn't very engaging after a while. But what if you throw in some higher level intelligent undead and have them serve as a "commander?" Suddenly your zombies and skeletons start using tactics, and the players will realize something isn't right and completely change their approach to combat! It does get a little frustrating, though, when you have players taking forever to figure out what they want to do, forgetting all their abilities, mindlessly approaching enemies, etc. while you're sitting there running multiple characters simultaneously from 3+ books worth of abilities and lore, are also factoring in their characters' abilities and actions, the plot, the terrain, are tracking any battlefield effects and/or traps, and are even roleplaying during the battle...and yet you're still taking only about a minute per monster to act!
Agreed with all of these though i have a different process flow as a dm. Here's mine: 1. is there a spellcaster on the field? Are they concentrating on something? can i reach them with any of my attacks or spells? there's nothing preventing me from hitting them effectively right? if the answers to all of these questions are yes, then that's the default target of all of my monsters/villains. if there's a no, move to... 2. who's the strongest damager on the field? if no one has dealt damage yet, is there a ranged attacker on the field? can i reach them with any of my attacks or spells? there's nothing preventing me from hitting them effectively right? if the answers to all of these questions or yes, then that's the secondary target of all of my monsters/villains. if theres a no, move to... 3. is there someone i can hit with advantage? can i reach them with any of my attacks or spells? there's nothing preventing me from hitting them effectively right? if the answers to all of these questions or yes, then that's the tertiary target of all of my monsters/villains. if there's a no, move to... 4. which target can i reach with my attacks and spells that i can attack effectively and is the furthest i can reach with my movement (tougher players tend to want to go up front)? so when i made my own armor of agathys build my own tactics were: 1. avoid wearing heavy armor 2. open with a concen spell that attempts to control enemies 3. present myself in melee 4. shout insults about their mother and invite them to a dance-off
I'm currently playing the classic Order 1 Clockwork 19, with a background that provides Spirit Guardians. Even with a high AC and AoA up, you can guess who enemies want to hit with that guardians going on. Being large regularly also helps quite a bit with Potions of Growth decently available. Good topics covered!
I'm playing in a campaign where I'm an armorer artificer with a high AC, just a touch under the AC of the bladesinger multiclass in our party who brags about his AC and the Shield spell every chance he gets. Guess which one of us has taken more attack rolls. Guess which one of us died to a crit from a Kobold Press monster that has a save vs death mechanic.
I'm really excited for this build! I love builds that take one concept and optimize around it (whether it's a spell or other concepts, themes, or abilities). Thank you for this, Chris!
Watching this video as someone who is mostly a DM is pretty funny. But yeah, you're right. Honestly, my players aren't big optimizers anyways so usually I intentionally let the tankiest characters do the tanking. Sure, the bard can do some pretty dangerous fear effects, but the fighter loves it when everyone swarms them so I do it. Lets them feel like they're playing their role in combat.
The last thing you said on #2 of DM tactics, that the DM's decisions are going to be more simplistic. This is why I like the revised monster stat blocks that are coming out. Spellcasters have a non-spell "spell attack" that is one damage type and both melee or ranged (and can't be counterspelled). So now I don't have to look at Shocking Grasp vs Toll the Dead (one is a melee spell attack and the other is a ranged saving throw).
You could also talk to your DM when you are creating your character and let them know this is the kind of thing you are wanting to do. This way you will know if it's something the DM is okay in indulging or if the playstyle isn't right for this particular game.
One thing I will mention, monsters in games aren't controlled by an AI in like 99% of cases, they're controlled by an algorithm, which is an important distinction, because an AI probably would need to be manipulated in a similar way to this.
I've seen algorithm based enemies run into dead ends or closed loops before. Like you can put someone at 1 HP on top of an inaccessible cliff and the enemies will all put their entire turns into failing to climb. I don't know the complete difference but the brains behind enemies cam be very tricky. At the table tho you just have to make your DM think you deserve it.
Very excited for this armor of agathys build. Hexblade/Barbarian? Strength as primary ability score. Go in raging, land a grapple attack recklessly. You are screaming hit me which is just what you want as your resistance to damage will allow armor of agathys to proc multiple times.
For that aggro magnet build I would love Treantmonk to talk about the following combo : Variant Human (magic initiate Druid with Shillelagh + Thorn Whip), Arcana Cleric (Booming Blade/Green Flame Blade), War Caster. (if your campaign goes to max level you can probably go Nature Cleric instead if you want to trade damage and probably DEX/Initiative bonus for a bit more AC) I've only seen few people talking about it and it's absolutely insane as a frontliner. Decent AC (but not impossible), Massive crowd control, SAD, massive damage, advantage on Concentration check, Magic Missile and Dispel Magic available all the time to break enemy concentartion, healing, and everything you need to lock down a threat in place and create space for your buddies. Plus you can do everything a cleric does. And if your team follows you and stay in the space that you create you feel like Brigitte in Overwatch. My frontline Arcana Cleric is drawing soooo much attention from the GM as she knows that as soon as I pop Spirit Guardian and get engaged with enemies in close combat, they have little to no way to escape unless they damage me and break my concentration (though it's harder with War Caster), yet they need to escape given the amount of damage done by SG. If they want to escape, good luck : OA with Thorn Whip (thanks to Magic Initiate) to get them back in the SG area if not locked in melee with me again, or with Booming Blade to discourage/punish them hard from moving.
On the other hand, an intelligent enemy who is attacking a target with AoA active may feel very disincentivized to continue attacking you, despite some or all of the above. If they realize (and there is no way they shouldn't) that every time they hit you, THEY take damage, and YOU aren't even scratched (thanks to AoA temporary HP / Arcane Ward / Bastion of Law / other bubbles), that's conceivably much worse than not hitting anyone. Food for thought.
Great video, love the summary of the enemy tactics! I'm literally just about to upload a build video (well, once it finishes rendering...) which revolves around drawing and redirecting enemy attacks so the timing on this is wonderful! :D Any thoughts on players who attempt to use roleplay to draw enemy attacks? E.g. shouting out a taunt to creatures as a free action.
The flaw in your argument is that the DM is actually TACTICAL. I had a DM who argued it was only "logical" that the NPCs would target the caster/range characters as they do the most damage. On the surface this makes sense but it lead our DM to doing extremely non-tactical and down right stupid behavior. The result was the monsters would commonly start by charging the back line players and thus run by the front line melee characters provoking attacks of opportunity. The result was we wiped the floor over and over with the encounters as we got lots of AoO and flanking bonuses. While we were wiping the floor with combat it caused the DM to think our characters were OP and continued to raise the CR of our encounters to the point we got a TPK when we got pitted in a locked room against a monster that we needed 15+ to hit on and that had resistances to some of most commonly used abilities. But even before that encounter our spellcaster was ready to quit as despite the party winning he often went down on over half the fights due to his low HP and focus fire from NPCs, even stupid NPCs like spiders/wolves/etc. And this was at the START of combat before the enemy could even know he was a spell caster or did any damage. So most combats for our poor caster was like 75% of the monsters charging him and other 25% charging the ranger. Followed by him needing to disengage and try to flee/heal only to have them do it again next turn and then hoping not to bleed out before the fight ends. He had a lot more patients then me, if DM pulled that BS on me after like the 2nd session I'd rip into him on how mentally retarded he was as well as Meta-gaming like all get out and then walk out and never play at his table again. After all we're all there to have fun and if it's not fun it's like any abusive relationship you need to just walk away. The caster while he did raise issue with being the punching bag was largely ignored as the DM doubled down his position of "smart enemies target the caster first", even if it meant suicidal charges as apparently wanting to live isn't smart. The caster ended up simply making up RL excuses as to why he could not play anymore after the TPK. I was friends with the caster outside the game so I knew he didn't really have anything going on. As one of the fighters I just told the DM I wasn't interested in another campaign as he didn't know how to properly balance encounters and was using meta game knowledge to control his NPCs.
Great video! Completely unrelated I have been thinking that a build that really needs an update is the conjuration wizard. Post-Tasha’s, it would be really interesting to see which summons you would select (Assuming that there would be a mix of pre-Tasha’s and Tasha’s summons chosen) and when each would be optimally used.
As someone who is playing a 13th level conjuration wizard right now I kind of find that the answer tends to be “pick one, it doesn’t really matter which” and “upcast it as necessary”. There is some extra utility in some of the later spells (like being able to get resistance, and having a large creature with flying for an hour) but if you’re playing for damage/raw effectivness it’s mainly just going to be how you want to flavor your wizard. As a conjuration wizard so may of your other choices matter a lot more than the choice of summon. And this is even if you end up using the summon in a majority of combats (you may not!) since there are a lot of powerful concentration spells to utilize
I like how Barbarian fulfills all of these requirements except concentration, lol. I've always loved Barbarian/Warlock multiclassing. It makes the lack of spell slots less of a problem, and you can use them for out-of-combat utility instead. Plus, a lot of the Barbarian's best features are available by level 6, so you can just go Warlock from then on and get a ton of cool benefits. Not to mention there are a ton of Eldritch Invocations that grant spell-like effects without being actual spells. Or just having an invisible imp nearby who makes it so all healing you receive is maxed out. Totally worth it on a Barbarian, lol.
colby from d4 deepdive made a build a while back which was a double build for 2 characters(this is my take on it), 1 was a centaur or of a race that could be used as a mount and that character would usually be a rogue, say a phantom with the sentinel feat, and the other character would be an earth genasi from monsters of the multiverse bladesinger(no more than 6 lvls for the extra attack and free cantrip cast) and a clockwork soul with the mounted combatant feat, so the bladesinger would put up armor of agathys and fire shield and use the mounted combatant feat to direct attacks against the centaur to it and through spells like armor of agathys, blade ward, fire shield and the bastion of law class feature would mitigate the dmg taken so that armor of agathys would last as long as possible, so you would reliably get double sneak dmg and a ton of retaliation dmg once you cast armor agathys at high lvls while also dealing a lot of dmg on your regular actions and your rogue friend pretty much free from taking any dmg in melee with amazing synergy between 2 characters
Before watching a video: I made the fighter champion archetype have additional "attack of opportunities" based on their proficiency bonus. They always have that one free one they get with their reaction. But they additional ones based on their proficiency bonus. Then at higher levels they can use these to throw a weapon (with the thrown property) as an attack of opportunity whenever they see an ally get targeted for an attack. They can even do this if all their hands are occupied with other things. This way the champion fighter CAN'T be as easily ignored because of so many attacks they can dish out outside of their turn. With every one of them having a possibility of critically striking
I like how you end every video with D and D is for everyone. That is a very Inviting statement For those that feel excluded. Thank you for your kindness...
I find the biggest barrier to anything involving strategy is the other players. 50% of them can't remember. 50% can't understand. 50% won't cooperate. I mean seriously, the "teammates" are far more difficult than anything the DM is going to do.
This would make a great video idea. How can you get other players to remember better, understand better, or work as a better team, without actually outright telling them to wake up and read stuff. I know effort and google are hard.
"All right, Abjuration Wizard, you're up. What do you do?" "I'm going to walk up to the horde of werewolves, lie down in a french girl pose, and tell them to give me all they got. Also, I cast Armor of Agathys."
1: Armor yourself with highest level spell slot you have 2: Concentrate on sprit guardians (or some other dot that doesn't require you to move) 3: Blade ward 4: This is the most important part: lie down on the ground and cover your head. This gives advantage to melee attacks and disadvantage on ranged attacks, both incentivising the attacks you want, and disincentivising those you don't, plus resistance to melee damage, while not cutting any sort of action. You can use athlete and mobile to get up every round and run your spirit guardians around. Just watch out for fireballs, I guess.
I've created a system for monster tactics for DND to apply into a custom futuristic space environment. Because I needed to create custom creatures, I needed some parameters too. So, I took Wisdom and Intelligence stats and considered their numbers. Wisdom counted for survival instinct and collective survival (e.g. a hive or nest) and Intelligence counted for raw tactics and even some cruelty. If a monster has 6-8 Wisdom, it will attack based on instinct and without any caution, but a creature with 12-14 Wisdom will try to consider their options and a monster with 18 Wisdom will even use its environment to its favor, where Intelligence 8-12 would consider attacking the highest damage delivering PC and a monster with 16-18 Intelligence would even attack a downed support PC to kill it right off because the creature saw the support PC saving his allies, so he KNOWS this PC needs to be killed in order for the monster to win. Higher the Wisdom, better the monster capability to survive smartly, higher the Intelligence, better the monster fighting ability to WIN the battle. It makes the game slightly harder but it changes the way players tackle the different situations.
If you are trying to get enemies to hit you with a melee attack, step out of their reach and provoke an opportunity attack. The only cost is movement. You may only get to do this trick once in an encounter with "smart" creatures. But with a horde of zombies you could Dash through the crowd and maybe get all of them to attack. Also remember to howl and cry a lot every time you get hit.
Hmm player psychology- that is the good stuff. But yeah never thought about that much. That is really right. Though the only difference was linked to group organization and numbers. And strictly speaking that is outside of the tactics you are going to employ I think. Really good stuff.
As a DM, do you ever (or frequently) take roleplaying into account when selecting targets? That is, do you take into consideration whether the actions or maybe dress of the characters might infuriate (drawing attacks) or intimidate (deterring attacks) the enemies? That sort of thing would vary quite a bit between types of enemy creatures, I imagine.
There's something to be said for just going prone if you want creatures to attack you in melee. It gives advantage within 5 ft and forces disadvantage beyond that. It seems a bit silly at first, but maybe its the right idea sometimes
A really good class at controlling the battlefield is the Ranger. If played correctly the ranger can control how combat goes. Especially if they go high enough to get the spell Nature’s wrath. It slows, entangles, and deals damage. Take the war caster feat early to gain advantage on con checks and pew pew at range while the spell does the rest.
My first time DMing was after playing Everquest and was inroduced to the concept of aggro and wanted to try it in TT. Had a earth elementals swarm the archer that fired off a volley on the first turn. Everyone started panicking as they all moved as a swarm from player to player. they eventually figured out how to have front line go in first then pile on.
Wanted a tank spent hours researching class features and settled on Ansestral guardian with warlock LVL 3 for armor of Agathas and gift of the ever living.
As a DM and a tactical player I love using int, dex, wisdom etc. from the stat blocks to "dictate" which PC I'm going to attack with a monster. I usually let my bravest PC ( the one who calls out "Kill me i'm here!" like in Predator movie!) get their wish often knowing that this is a distraction tactic because I've trained my Players (Nephews & Nieces and Siblings) to appeal to my love of predator. lol. Aggro is definitely one of the most fun aspects to tactical play. It's why i play summoners in fantasy....give enemies something else to chew on while i blast/shoot/look pretty in the back! lol
You forgot one of the most important tactics: Talking Smack! If the enemy can understand the characters, it is possible to to taunt them into attacking a specific character. Of course they might figure out that it is a tactic and disregard the character that does the taunting, but at the beginning of a combat it is very possible to paint a giant target on oneself by being lound and annoying. Especially if the party plays ball and quietly gets into advantageous positions.
My Githzerai Armorer Artificer has been the best at this; moving along the battlefield freely (Kinetic Jaunt and crafted Boots of Flying), and changing creatures attack strategies (Thunder Gauntlets, Booming Blade, Thorn Whip) with Perfected Armor: Guardian which is excellent against casters.
Assuming competant players with intelligent builds, you can largely assume each player can defend themselves. I'd love to play with such a party someday. My experience as a habitual tank is that if I screw up, squishies die. I will usually use terrain to my advantage so as to force enemies either to have no option but to engage me (gotta love doors) or at the very least have to pass through my zone of control to reach anyone else. I also strongly encourage at least the cleric to have as high an AC as possible to assist in blocking passages.
I love my high ac sentinel arcane trickster rogue. The DM is so conflicted on who to attack on the frontline. The rogue is hard to his, can half the damage on one attack if you somehow manage to get by his super ac AND shield. Or you can attack his buddy but you're doubling the sneak attacks he can get in a single round. Actually we also have a homebrew feat that lets you use a reaction without actually expending your reaction for that round a number of times up to your PB....so it's just even more brutal.
I’m surprised you didn’t mention intentionally drawing opportunity attacks from enemies! They usually have to be melee attacks, and they often do less damage than a full action from a monster. I usually just mount up and then gallop through the field like Theoden King to draw attacks.
That'll work for Armor of Agathys, but the ordinary reason you want to take hits isn't just to take as many hits as possible... It's to waste the enemy's actions. If you provoke attacks they weren't otherwise going to make, you're actually giving them MORE actions.
@@CJWproductions Well the video is mostly based around the idea that we want to make the most of AoA, but I would argue that the reason we want an enemy to hit us is to consume their *resources* not necessarily an action. In this instance HP and reactions. Enemies only get one reaction per turn and if we draw that out, it opens up the battlefield for our teammates and allows casters to work without fear of Counterspell Additionally if we are looking to deny enemy actions, dropping our opponent to 0 HP with our AoA is a pretty good idea. We have a chance deny a number of attacks from multi-attacking monsters that might otherwise target other melee party members if we can drop an enemy outside their turn by eating opportunity attacks Imho Drawing Attacks of Opportunity reinforces pretty much all the points in the video; it is a convenient attack for the enemy, if it hits our AoA causes damage, and if we finish our move in a spot where the enemy can still attack us we are still a convenient target. Even if our AoA is down, the enemy might miss, we could shield and we’ve still consumed the enemy reactions to the benefit of our party.
Following along with the logic presented, I think the suggestion spell would be awesome. You're in combat, so suggesting you're the biggest threat and they should attack you is reasonable. It's a concentration spell. Then just don't let anyone attack them while you dispatch other enemies.
Good outline of how to modify the behaviors of enemy attacks. 10:15 should be "Battle Smith's Steel Defender" rather than having stated Battle Master. NBD--it's very easy to make mistakes in longer form content.
The prolonged, shaky zoom in on Mat Mercer about 2 minutes in really has an almost horror film vibe. Mute it and put some scary music or sound effects on top and it really stands out. Was that an intententional decision in production or a happy accident?
And if you want to AVOID getting targeted, do the exact opposite of all of this. >Stay far out of melee >impose disadvantage on self >impose advantage on other targets (ideally not allies, but shared enemies. "let them fight") >don't concentrate on things so you're a low value target >don't deal sizeable direct damage so you're a low value target >when targeted, make yourself nigh-impossible to hit
Speaking of Armorer Thunder Gauntlets... I keep thinking about a multiclass investment of 3 levels into Ranger (a tad MAD) for Hunter. Getting Horde Breaker for an extra cleave-type attack without using any additional actions or bonus actions could be fun, spread that disadvantage debuff like a champ. You can use a shield to keep your AC high (always a magic shield with your infusions) and don't need a feat like Dual Wielder. Is a tank build like this really needed in the average party? Probably not. Will you lag in damage compared to a better melee attacker or spell effectiveness compared to a Cleric? To be sure. Despite the disadvantages, I still think think it'd be a sweet build.
seems overkill to go hunter with horde breaker when you could be a fighter centric character "only" dipping artificer 3 with int 13, taking the duel wielder feat and the two weapon fighting style to allow you to use the bonus action to attack a third time with the thunder gauntlets, using action surge that is up to 5 targets marked in a single turn
@@finalfantasy50 really different vibe, tho. Fighter main with Armorer dip, vs Artificer main with Hunter dip. Having lots of spell options as a half caster would be really handy, plus infusions, and a bonus action to spend freely. Not saying the fighter doesn't work, but that it offers a really different play style, different experience.
Yes, yes I can, when the enemy moves away from my barbarian sentinel (with a legendary action that lets them move without opportunity attacks) on the next round as I attack them I sing "captain plannet's in my spear gona stab the in the rear. Now my powers magnified and I'm gona do a genocide."
I feel like we’re building towards an Ancestral Guardian barbarian who uses reckless attacks and then multiclassing into Warlock for AoA and scaling slots
Celestial Patron would have good synergy with their BA healing dice that are not spells and can be self used to keep tanking after AoA might go down too
10:19 Shouldn’t some of these passive disadvantage sources [ancestral guardians, unwavering mark, etc.] be a real time effect? Meaning that the affected creature would see that other creatures would be more challenging to hit prior to making their first attack?
I like to think that concentration spells physicaly give some clear clue that you are focusing on a spell. Maybe you are chanting something very low constantly, or holding a finger in the forehead or the temples, holding tight your shining holy symbol or arcane focus, so that the usual grunt will be able to tell who's concentrating. I mean, when players are under some concentration spell, it's the player turn and he ask "who's concentrating on this?" I see no problem telling them. Enemies should have that insight as well. I don't think that's metagaming.
I want to guess where it will go for the next vid. Mark of Warding dwarf, cleric 1 with a heavy armor domain, and a fullcaster that gets extra attack. Knowign TM, most likely a bladesinger, because wizard, even if it means having no subclass untill level 7. Maybe picking up Heavy Armor master at wizard 4
It makes me wonder if you took a pre made campaign let your players minmaxed to their hearts content but told them all enemies will be fighting smart and to win within the frames of the rule, how well would they do.
I try and think of how non-intelligent creatures (like beasts in the wild) would react v. intelligent creatures with a heavy bias towards convenience. Although, I do slightly disagree with your "orcs on the road" example, I don't think all 4 Orcs would attack the front-liner because they are intelligent and you'd imagine have some experience fighting adventurers. I'd have two run by and go for the people at the three at the backline while the other two flank the front-liner. I don't want the players thinking all it takes is putting a high AC/high HP martial character in the open to just magically suck in all attackers like a black hole. ;)
@@CJWproductions Found the rule, I've never seen this played correctly, or mentioned in commonly misplayed rules videos. Ranged Attacks in Close Combat PHB p195 [-] Aiming a ranged attack is more difficult when a foe is next to you. When you make a ranged attack with a weapon, a spell, or some other means, you have disadvantage on the attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature who can see you and who isn't incapacitated.
So now I am imagining a guy why just runs in and tries to tackle people, grappling them and throwing himself to the ground while hugging them painfully to death 😂
I think I'm gonna push back on the idea that DMs shouldn't expect to "Win combat." Sure, DMs aren't expected to achieve a TPK every time (or even achieving a TPK at all), but I think that just "reducing all enemies to 0 hit points" isn't really sufficient as a win condition, either for DMs or for players. This is just the nature of having two disparate roles in the game, that Players and DMs are both striving to achieve the same thing: reach the end of the campaign. Players try to reach that end by fighting enemies, exploring the world, and growing their character with their experiences, but DMs don't reach that end by doing the same thing. DMs are trying to provide *challenge* to the players, and to put barriers between the character and their ending, which means a successful encounter for a DM is usually one that gives players a significant hurdle to overcome. Combat can't be so easy that players feel like everything was designed for them to kill it, but they also can't be so difficult that the player could never hope to succeed. This is where we come to another point: killing all enemies isn't the only win condition. In fact, that's usually the worst win condition to achieve, because it requires the use of the most party resources. Even if death is only a mistake that costs 300 gold and a 3rd level spell to reverse, a Diplomatic Victory, or even avoiding combat altogether through Stealth, are far more preferable in the long-term for players. Therefore, players who know, and are actively working towards these other win conditions, are technically winning, even though the DM isn't losing any creatures in the process. What matters is that the players feel as if they've overcome a challenge, and *how* they overcome that challenge just becomes a sematic issue. Therefore, I would say that an encounter being both challenging, but defeated, means both the players and the DM won that encounter. DMs have the power to gauge the encounter, and set the level of difficulty however they like, so a DM that manages to find that sweet spot of difficulty is still winning, even though their creatures didn't.
answer is no. you can dance around it all you want but reality of dnd is that tanking is not a thing, and the game needs to do better fixing it without us having to do it
That's because if you drill all the way down, tank isn't a role. All 'tanks' are either control, support or DPS characters. Your 'traditional' tank is the control tank. They're focussed on being sticky, enemies have a hard time moving away from them because of grapples, trips, etc. The easiest way to escape is to disable the tank. There's also the "all attacks against anyone but me are debuffed"-type control effects. All this does is control enemy movement and behaviour, fundamentally no different from dumping control spells on the field, though typically with less range and expending a different resource. The support tank instead makes allies less appealing targets. This is your buff-aura tank or your attack-absorbing tank. It's difficult to do any meaningful damage to anyone else while they're alive. Fundamentally no different from your standard support-bot caster. DPS tanks cover 2 distinct niches. The obvious is big threatening DPS characters that can afford to take a hit. The other type is mechanical jank where the DPS relies on getting hit to deal their damage. In all of these cases, 'tanking' is incidental to the role. It generally just means the character has traded the range their role normally operates at for a survivability buffer. There is nothing that tanking uniquely offers.
I think it's easier for Clerics: Wear Medium Armor, have 14 Dex, cast Concentration Spells (probably Spiritual Guardian), scream "I am Concentrating on a spell, if you lads dont break mine, u r all screwed!" than do Dodge action as if your life is depend on it.
This is my strategy. "Come get some, losers".
Your life probably does depend on it
Don't forget Sanctuary
@@JosiahAkaBrick Doesn't Sanctuary just take you out of combat for a turn at the cost of a spell slot?
@@NoBrakes23 Still in combat, attackers need to make a save to be able to target you. If they fail, they have to change targets, potentially forfeiting attack.
tools I've used to generate aggro as a paladin in 5e: strong opportunity attacks via smite or warcaster - conditioning the dm to avoid provoking opp attacks from me via smites can go a long way. maintaining concentration on aoe party buffs like bless. calling the enemies' attention in character (and the dm's attention out of character) to my defensive auras. impairing enemy mobility via crown or, especially, conquest aura. straight up role playing. paladins are charismatic, play them with big, hard to ignore personalities. insult enemies, challenge them, appeal to them. dms will often play along.
And then they attack the bard cause the your mom joke they used for vicious mockery hit a heartstring
I use sentinel, and my DM has caught on that if it's my turn I usually don't smite unless it's a crit or we are fighting something super scary, but if I'm hitting them with an attack of opportunity I'm smiting the crap out of them.
I'm always confused when the subject of "tanking mechanics" comes up in D&D, because it's very simple:
*To gain aggro in D&D, you don't taunt the creature, you taunt the DM.*
There is one way I have been able to often "win" aggro as a player, and that is by just taunting the monsters. Whenever you are making an attack you can freely narrate it in any way you want, and time and time again I have met with enemies that were willing to focus me for acting like an absolute bully. Like, when I make an attack against an animal, I also bash my shield with my weapon menacingly and kick dust in its direction. When I attack a humanoid, I also mock them, spit in their face or so. And don't even get me started on how vain dragons are willing to attack the person that calls them an overgrown iguana with bad breath.
Doesn't work all the time but it does sometimes and it certainly makes fights more flavorful too.
When attacking Fiends, Demons, and Devils, I like to suggest that they have Celestial ancestry or are guilty of doing good deeds when no one is looking. The DM usually plays along.
These are all great ideas honestly, I will have to incorporate them more I think into my own playstyle. A great way to combine mechanics and RP.
A good DM plays along, yeah. Another thing to do against particularly monstrous, bloodthirsty enemies is something dramatic like biting a finger so hard it bleeds. This makes for cool moments and often works!
Why the monsters. Remove the middle ground. Taunt the dm. It works everytime
Another point is that enemies might have certain meta-knowledge about how their world works and understand how dangerous/powerful certain classes and characters are relative to others. While the typical goblin or ooze wouldn't, maybe an highly experienced knight or a scheming devil would target knows the problems casters can cause and makes sure to take care of them first.
And know how to take care of them. AND actually have access to the tools to do so? So many questions like this guide more natural and easier to choose npc motive/actions.
@@larkohiya Yes. Even in TM's "open field vs orcs" example, my first thought was that 1/2 of the orcs would surround the front liner, while the other 1/2 would move E S-E towards the players back line, ranged attacking on the way to draw the players out. As a DM, I play my orcs as tactically sound hit-and-run merc units; they need to be represented with some cunning to communicate the threat level they impose imo.
@@pranakhan a lot of the how and why isn't super detailed in mechanical form on a lot of popular media formats. Most things theater of the mind it or keep engagements smaller affairs because the table is doing loose dice rolling (not using automated systems, not using the standard damage for mobs, not being prepared and wasting time checking notes) which eats up a lot of the time that otherwise would actually challenge parties in ways the number crunch of the system actually works well within.
14:00 yes, yes they are, at least every time when I'm DMing.
The orc "Aggressive" monster trait is absolutely made to create combat scenarios were they charge directly into the rearguard.
Three of those orcs can actually engage in melee at least one of the other characters.
yeah his example scenarios are often bunk
This is a great video. I don't know about you guys, but it's so interesting when you have the chance to be DM and player on weekly games. Since I'm a player, I understand how players approach encounters, the same as being a DM.
The one thing I dislike is that I overthink everything and end up making up a strategy for every PC, NPC and monster in the battlefield, so I get a "little bit" frustrated when people take too long in their turns or if they don't use any strategy at all. It's a blessing and a curse.
One thing that I've had a hard time explaining to some players is that D&D isn't a videogame. A monster with decent Int or Wis isn't going to act like a Skyrim enemy: "oh, it must have been the wind" when they get hit by a hidden PC or "oh, this guy is the - tank - , of course everyone is going to waste their attacks on this one enemy and let the other 4 kill them with ranged attacks".
A little bit of a rant lol. Sorry.
Yeah, that's something that my players love and hate about my encounters: they know NPCs react like living beings, so the PCs do all manner of creative stunts to draw focus and manipulate foes. A few times new players have thought it would be like Skyrim NPCs, but I typically have at least 1 experienced player that can help them by example of how they can interact with characters like real creatures, be they friend or foe. Role play is rewarded, allowing players to deceive, fluster, or enrage foes through their words and actions. My party actually manipulated some yetis the other day by doing this: the enemies were above them on a cliff tossing rocks, so the party mounted the head of a packmate they had slain earlier onto a pike and flaunted it. This enraged them so much the rest of the pack jumped down and attacked the one with the pike all at once, making for a dangerous encounter but allowing the party to dispatch their foes.
It's nice having more "realistic" NPCs as it also can work to spice up combat: for example, zombies are usually mindless drones that attack whatever's closest, which isn't very engaging after a while. But what if you throw in some higher level intelligent undead and have them serve as a "commander?" Suddenly your zombies and skeletons start using tactics, and the players will realize something isn't right and completely change their approach to combat!
It does get a little frustrating, though, when you have players taking forever to figure out what they want to do, forgetting all their abilities, mindlessly approaching enemies, etc. while you're sitting there running multiple characters simultaneously from 3+ books worth of abilities and lore, are also factoring in their characters' abilities and actions, the plot, the terrain, are tracking any battlefield effects and/or traps, and are even roleplaying during the battle...and yet you're still taking only about a minute per monster to act!
Agreed with all of these though i have a different process flow as a dm. Here's mine:
1. is there a spellcaster on the field? Are they concentrating on something? can i reach them with any of my attacks or spells? there's nothing preventing me from hitting them effectively right? if the answers to all of these questions are yes, then that's the default target of all of my monsters/villains.
if there's a no, move to...
2. who's the strongest damager on the field? if no one has dealt damage yet, is there a ranged attacker on the field? can i reach them with any of my attacks or spells? there's nothing preventing me from hitting them effectively right? if the answers to all of these questions or yes, then that's the secondary target of all of my monsters/villains.
if theres a no, move to...
3. is there someone i can hit with advantage? can i reach them with any of my attacks or spells? there's nothing preventing me from hitting them effectively right? if the answers to all of these questions or yes, then that's the tertiary target of all of my monsters/villains.
if there's a no, move to...
4. which target can i reach with my attacks and spells that i can attack effectively and is the furthest i can reach with my movement (tougher players tend to want to go up front)?
so when i made my own armor of agathys build my own tactics were:
1. avoid wearing heavy armor
2. open with a concen spell that attempts to control enemies
3. present myself in melee
4. shout insults about their mother and invite them to a dance-off
I'm currently playing the classic Order 1 Clockwork 19, with a background that provides Spirit Guardians. Even with a high AC and AoA up, you can guess who enemies want to hit with that guardians going on.
Being large regularly also helps quite a bit with Potions of Growth decently available.
Good topics covered!
The secret method of guaranteeing ur the target - piss off the dm /s
Take the last slice. "MMMMM....soooo goood." builds max aggro.
I'm playing in a campaign where I'm an armorer artificer with a high AC, just a touch under the AC of the bladesinger multiclass in our party who brags about his AC and the Shield spell every chance he gets. Guess which one of us has taken more attack rolls. Guess which one of us died to a crit from a Kobold Press monster that has a save vs death mechanic.
Insightful. Thanks for making this.
I'm really excited for this build! I love builds that take one concept and optimize around it (whether it's a spell or other concepts, themes, or abilities). Thank you for this, Chris!
Watching this video as someone who is mostly a DM is pretty funny. But yeah, you're right. Honestly, my players aren't big optimizers anyways so usually I intentionally let the tankiest characters do the tanking. Sure, the bard can do some pretty dangerous fear effects, but the fighter loves it when everyone swarms them so I do it. Lets them feel like they're playing their role in combat.
The last thing you said on #2 of DM tactics, that the DM's decisions are going to be more simplistic. This is why I like the revised monster stat blocks that are coming out. Spellcasters have a non-spell "spell attack" that is one damage type and both melee or ranged (and can't be counterspelled). So now I don't have to look at Shocking Grasp vs Toll the Dead (one is a melee spell attack and the other is a ranged saving throw).
You could also talk to your DM when you are creating your character and let them know this is the kind of thing you are wanting to do. This way you will know if it's something the DM is okay in indulging or if the playstyle isn't right for this particular game.
One thing I will mention, monsters in games aren't controlled by an AI in like 99% of cases, they're controlled by an algorithm, which is an important distinction, because an AI probably would need to be manipulated in a similar way to this.
I've seen algorithm based enemies run into dead ends or closed loops before. Like you can put someone at 1 HP on top of an inaccessible cliff and the enemies will all put their entire turns into failing to climb. I don't know the complete difference but the brains behind enemies cam be very tricky.
At the table tho you just have to make your DM think you deserve it.
Spells like Blink, Compelled Duel, Mirror image also play a big role.
For intelligent enemies: healers are also having a big arrow above their head
The DM part of this video is superb advice and very helpful to think about (as both a player and a sometime DM)...
Love these tactics videos! Hope this one does well.
Very excited for this armor of agathys build. Hexblade/Barbarian? Strength as primary ability score. Go in raging, land a grapple attack recklessly. You are screaming hit me which is just what you want as your resistance to damage will allow armor of agathys to proc multiple times.
For that aggro magnet build I would love Treantmonk to talk about the following combo : Variant Human (magic initiate Druid with Shillelagh + Thorn Whip), Arcana Cleric (Booming Blade/Green Flame Blade), War Caster.
(if your campaign goes to max level you can probably go Nature Cleric instead if you want to trade damage and probably DEX/Initiative bonus for a bit more AC)
I've only seen few people talking about it and it's absolutely insane as a frontliner. Decent AC (but not impossible), Massive crowd control, SAD, massive damage, advantage on Concentration check, Magic Missile and Dispel Magic available all the time to break enemy concentartion, healing, and everything you need to lock down a threat in place and create space for your buddies. Plus you can do everything a cleric does. And if your team follows you and stay in the space that you create you feel like Brigitte in Overwatch.
My frontline Arcana Cleric is drawing soooo much attention from the GM as she knows that as soon as I pop Spirit Guardian and get engaged with enemies in close combat, they have little to no way to escape unless they damage me and break my concentration (though it's harder with War Caster), yet they need to escape given the amount of damage done by SG.
If they want to escape, good luck : OA with Thorn Whip (thanks to Magic Initiate) to get them back in the SG area if not locked in melee with me again, or with Booming Blade to discourage/punish them hard from moving.
On the other hand, an intelligent enemy who is attacking a target with AoA active may feel very disincentivized to continue attacking you, despite some or all of the above. If they realize (and there is no way they shouldn't) that every time they hit you, THEY take damage, and YOU aren't even scratched (thanks to AoA temporary HP / Arcane Ward / Bastion of Law / other bubbles), that's conceivably much worse than not hitting anyone. Food for thought.
Great video, love the summary of the enemy tactics! I'm literally just about to upload a build video (well, once it finishes rendering...) which revolves around drawing and redirecting enemy attacks so the timing on this is wonderful! :D
Any thoughts on players who attempt to use roleplay to draw enemy attacks? E.g. shouting out a taunt to creatures as a free action.
It's probably something I should have mentioned in the video. Yes, I'm more likely to have monsters attack a character that taunts them for sure.
The flaw in your argument is that the DM is actually TACTICAL. I had a DM who argued it was only "logical" that the NPCs would target the caster/range characters as they do the most damage. On the surface this makes sense but it lead our DM to doing extremely non-tactical and down right stupid behavior. The result was the monsters would commonly start by charging the back line players and thus run by the front line melee characters provoking attacks of opportunity. The result was we wiped the floor over and over with the encounters as we got lots of AoO and flanking bonuses.
While we were wiping the floor with combat it caused the DM to think our characters were OP and continued to raise the CR of our encounters to the point we got a TPK when we got pitted in a locked room against a monster that we needed 15+ to hit on and that had resistances to some of most commonly used abilities. But even before that encounter our spellcaster was ready to quit as despite the party winning he often went down on over half the fights due to his low HP and focus fire from NPCs, even stupid NPCs like spiders/wolves/etc. And this was at the START of combat before the enemy could even know he was a spell caster or did any damage.
So most combats for our poor caster was like 75% of the monsters charging him and other 25% charging the ranger. Followed by him needing to disengage and try to flee/heal only to have them do it again next turn and then hoping not to bleed out before the fight ends. He had a lot more patients then me, if DM pulled that BS on me after like the 2nd session I'd rip into him on how mentally retarded he was as well as Meta-gaming like all get out and then walk out and never play at his table again. After all we're all there to have fun and if it's not fun it's like any abusive relationship you need to just walk away.
The caster while he did raise issue with being the punching bag was largely ignored as the DM doubled down his position of "smart enemies target the caster first", even if it meant suicidal charges as apparently wanting to live isn't smart. The caster ended up simply making up RL excuses as to why he could not play anymore after the TPK. I was friends with the caster outside the game so I knew he didn't really have anything going on. As one of the fighters I just told the DM I wasn't interested in another campaign as he didn't know how to properly balance encounters and was using meta game knowledge to control his NPCs.
The previous 2 videos keep making me think about my ancestral hexblade guardian and I really want to play him now
Great video! Completely unrelated I have been thinking that a build that really needs an update is the conjuration wizard. Post-Tasha’s, it would be really interesting to see which summons you would select (Assuming that there would be a mix of pre-Tasha’s and Tasha’s summons chosen) and when each would be optimally used.
As someone who is playing a 13th level conjuration wizard right now I kind of find that the answer tends to be “pick one, it doesn’t really matter which” and “upcast it as necessary”. There is some extra utility in some of the later spells (like being able to get resistance, and having a large creature with flying for an hour) but if you’re playing for damage/raw effectivness it’s mainly just going to be how you want to flavor your wizard.
As a conjuration wizard so may of your other choices matter a lot more than the choice of summon. And this is even if you end up using the summon in a majority of combats (you may not!) since there are a lot of powerful concentration spells to utilize
Having my bladesinger cast haste and concentrate on it has made him a very tempting target for enemies despite their abysmal chance to hit him.
I like how Barbarian fulfills all of these requirements except concentration, lol. I've always loved Barbarian/Warlock multiclassing. It makes the lack of spell slots less of a problem, and you can use them for out-of-combat utility instead. Plus, a lot of the Barbarian's best features are available by level 6, so you can just go Warlock from then on and get a ton of cool benefits. Not to mention there are a ton of Eldritch Invocations that grant spell-like effects without being actual spells. Or just having an invisible imp nearby who makes it so all healing you receive is maxed out. Totally worth it on a Barbarian, lol.
colby from d4 deepdive made a build a while back which was a double build for 2 characters(this is my take on it), 1 was a centaur or of a race that could be used as a mount and that character would usually be a rogue, say a phantom with the sentinel feat, and the other character would be an earth genasi from monsters of the multiverse bladesinger(no more than 6 lvls for the extra attack and free cantrip cast) and a clockwork soul with the mounted combatant feat, so the bladesinger would put up armor of agathys and fire shield and use the mounted combatant feat to direct attacks against the centaur to it and through spells like armor of agathys, blade ward, fire shield and the bastion of law class feature would mitigate the dmg taken so that armor of agathys would last as long as possible, so you would reliably get double sneak dmg and a ton of retaliation dmg once you cast armor agathys at high lvls while also dealing a lot of dmg on your regular actions and your rogue friend pretty much free from taking any dmg in melee with amazing synergy between 2 characters
Would love to hear your opinion on using the Mounted Combatant Feat and riding another character to protect them!
"Or a battle master's steel defender..."
i cant believe the fighter is making robots now
"If the machines die fighting for humans, then they can't rise up against us." - Sun Tzu, probably
Before watching a video: I made the fighter champion archetype have additional "attack of opportunities" based on their proficiency bonus. They always have that one free one they get with their reaction. But they additional ones based on their proficiency bonus. Then at higher levels they can use these to throw a weapon (with the thrown property) as an attack of opportunity whenever they see an ally get targeted for an attack. They can even do this if all their hands are occupied with other things. This way the champion fighter CAN'T be as easily ignored because of so many attacks they can dish out outside of their turn. With every one of them having a possibility of critically striking
I like how you end every video with D and D is for everyone. That is a very Inviting statement For those that feel excluded. Thank you for your kindness...
I find the biggest barrier to anything involving strategy is the other players. 50% of them can't remember. 50% can't understand. 50% won't cooperate.
I mean seriously, the "teammates" are far more difficult than anything the DM is going to do.
150% of team members do the wrong things!
This would make a great video idea. How can you get other players to remember better, understand better, or work as a better team, without actually outright telling them to wake up and read stuff. I know effort and google are hard.
@@TreantmonksTemple there's a high degree of overlap. A single player with all three of those malfunctions can often derail ever encounter.
@@danawolfe1619 if you could figure this out in d&d, it would have applications in lots of other areas of life. You'd go down in history like Plato.
"All right, Abjuration Wizard, you're up. What do you do?"
"I'm going to walk up to the horde of werewolves, lie down in a french girl pose, and tell them to give me all they got. Also, I cast Armor of Agathys."
1: Armor yourself with highest level spell slot you have
2: Concentrate on sprit guardians (or some other dot that doesn't require you to move)
3: Blade ward
4: This is the most important part: lie down on the ground and cover your head.
This gives advantage to melee attacks and disadvantage on ranged attacks, both incentivising the attacks you want, and disincentivising those you don't, plus resistance to melee damage, while not cutting any sort of action. You can use athlete and mobile to get up every round and run your spirit guardians around. Just watch out for fireballs, I guess.
I've created a system for monster tactics for DND to apply into a custom futuristic space environment. Because I needed to create custom creatures, I needed some parameters too. So, I took Wisdom and Intelligence stats and considered their numbers. Wisdom counted for survival instinct and collective survival (e.g. a hive or nest) and Intelligence counted for raw tactics and even some cruelty. If a monster has 6-8 Wisdom, it will attack based on instinct and without any caution, but a creature with 12-14 Wisdom will try to consider their options and a monster with 18 Wisdom will even use its environment to its favor, where Intelligence 8-12 would consider attacking the highest damage delivering PC and a monster with 16-18 Intelligence would even attack a downed support PC to kill it right off because the creature saw the support PC saving his allies, so he KNOWS this PC needs to be killed in order for the monster to win. Higher the Wisdom, better the monster capability to survive smartly, higher the Intelligence, better the monster fighting ability to WIN the battle. It makes the game slightly harder but it changes the way players tackle the different situations.
If you are trying to get enemies to hit you with a melee attack, step out of their reach and provoke an opportunity attack. The only cost is movement. You may only get to do this trick once in an encounter with "smart" creatures. But with a horde of zombies you could Dash through the crowd and maybe get all of them to attack.
Also remember to howl and cry a lot every time you get hit.
add in heavy armor master and you could clear an entire minion horde with an upcast AoA
Hmm player psychology- that is the good stuff. But yeah never thought about that much. That is really right. Though the only difference was linked to group organization and numbers. And strictly speaking that is outside of the tactics you are going to employ I think. Really good stuff.
As a DM, do you ever (or frequently) take roleplaying into account when selecting targets? That is, do you take into consideration whether the actions or maybe dress of the characters might infuriate (drawing attacks) or intimidate (deterring attacks) the enemies? That sort of thing would vary quite a bit between types of enemy creatures, I imagine.
Definitely. Had a bunch of wizard hating goblins, who had been enslaved by an old arcane coot, go straight for the wizard.
Ha ha... this feels strangely timely...
With regards to the new tank ranking you made I assume where one important detail is how likely are you to draw aggro.
I think armour of Agathys would work really well with the wind wall spell: concentration, completely blocking ranged attacks.
There's something to be said for just going prone if you want creatures to attack you in melee. It gives advantage within 5 ft and forces disadvantage beyond that. It seems a bit silly at first, but maybe its the right idea sometimes
Aggro is an interesting topic in TTRPGs - nice to see it covered...
A really good class at controlling the battlefield is the Ranger. If played correctly the ranger can control how combat goes. Especially if they go high enough to get the spell Nature’s wrath. It slows, entangles, and deals damage.
Take the war caster feat early to gain advantage on con checks and pew pew at range while the spell does the rest.
My first time DMing was after playing Everquest and was inroduced to the concept of aggro and wanted to try it in TT. Had a earth elementals swarm the archer that fired off a volley on the first turn. Everyone started panicking as they all moved as a swarm from player to player. they eventually figured out how to have front line go in first then pile on.
Wanted a tank spent hours researching class features and settled on Ansestral guardian with warlock LVL 3 for armor of Agathas and gift of the ever living.
Went dhampire and took charger feat. So now my bite attack on charge deals 1d4+5 and I heal every time I use it for 6-9 HP
As a DM and a tactical player I love using int, dex, wisdom etc. from the stat blocks to "dictate" which PC I'm going to attack with a monster. I usually let my bravest PC ( the one who calls out "Kill me i'm here!" like in Predator movie!) get their wish often knowing that this is a distraction tactic because I've trained my Players (Nephews & Nieces and Siblings) to appeal to my love of predator. lol. Aggro is definitely one of the most fun aspects to tactical play. It's why i play summoners in fantasy....give enemies something else to chew on while i blast/shoot/look pretty in the back! lol
You forgot one of the most important tactics: Talking Smack! If the enemy can understand the characters, it is possible to to taunt them into attacking a specific character. Of course they might figure out that it is a tactic and disregard the character that does the taunting, but at the beginning of a combat it is very possible to paint a giant target on oneself by being lound and annoying. Especially if the party plays ball and quietly gets into advantageous positions.
I like your battle maps.
My Githzerai Armorer Artificer has been the best at this; moving along the battlefield freely (Kinetic Jaunt and crafted Boots of Flying), and changing creatures attack strategies (Thunder Gauntlets, Booming Blade, Thorn Whip) with Perfected Armor: Guardian which is excellent against casters.
Assuming competant players with intelligent builds, you can largely assume each player can defend themselves. I'd love to play with such a party someday. My experience as a habitual tank is that if I screw up, squishies die. I will usually use terrain to my advantage so as to force enemies either to have no option but to engage me (gotta love doors) or at the very least have to pass through my zone of control to reach anyone else. I also strongly encourage at least the cleric to have as high an AC as possible to assist in blocking passages.
I love my high ac sentinel arcane trickster rogue. The DM is so conflicted on who to attack on the frontline. The rogue is hard to his, can half the damage on one attack if you somehow manage to get by his super ac AND shield. Or you can attack his buddy but you're doubling the sneak attacks he can get in a single round. Actually we also have a homebrew feat that lets you use a reaction without actually expending your reaction for that round a number of times up to your PB....so it's just even more brutal.
Thank you for acknowledging ff14 and including enmity
great video again chris . ty for the content. you should send the dnd devs some ideas .
I’m surprised you didn’t mention intentionally drawing opportunity attacks from enemies! They usually have to be melee attacks, and they often do less damage than a full action from a monster. I usually just mount up and then gallop through the field like Theoden King to draw attacks.
That'll work for Armor of Agathys, but the ordinary reason you want to take hits isn't just to take as many hits as possible... It's to waste the enemy's actions.
If you provoke attacks they weren't otherwise going to make, you're actually giving them MORE actions.
@@CJWproductions Well the video is mostly based around the idea that we want to make the most of AoA, but I would argue that the reason we want an enemy to hit us is to consume their *resources* not necessarily an action. In this instance HP and reactions.
Enemies only get one reaction per turn and if we draw that out, it opens up the battlefield for our teammates and allows casters to work without fear of Counterspell
Additionally if we are looking to deny enemy actions, dropping our opponent to 0 HP with our AoA is a pretty good idea. We have a chance deny a number of attacks from multi-attacking monsters that might otherwise target other melee party members if we can drop an enemy outside their turn by eating opportunity attacks
Imho Drawing Attacks of Opportunity reinforces pretty much all the points in the video; it is a convenient attack for the enemy, if it hits our AoA causes damage, and if we finish our move in a spot where the enemy can still attack us we are still a convenient target. Even if our AoA is down, the enemy might miss, we could shield and we’ve still consumed the enemy reactions to the benefit of our party.
Does Armor of Agathys hit those who hit you with Thorn Whip from 30 ft, since Thorn Whip is a melee attack?
Yep. Hit the nail on the head.
Any melee attack. That would include thorn whip from 30 ft.
Ahh... the Protection Fighting Style - the best fighting style that nobody will ever take!
My cavalier has protection, and uses it a lot!
Following along with the logic presented, I think the suggestion spell would be awesome. You're in combat, so suggesting you're the biggest threat and they should attack you is reasonable. It's a concentration spell. Then just don't let anyone attack them while you dispatch other enemies.
Good outline of how to modify the behaviors of enemy attacks.
10:15 should be "Battle Smith's Steel Defender" rather than having stated Battle Master. NBD--it's very easy to make mistakes in longer form content.
The prolonged, shaky zoom in on Mat Mercer about 2 minutes in really has an almost horror film vibe. Mute it and put some scary music or sound effects on top and it really stands out. Was that an intententional decision in production or a happy accident?
Hoooo boy this is gonna be a real eye-catcher
Armor of Agathys + Blade Ward + Nterceprion Syle to reduce damage in a doorway.
And if you want to AVOID getting targeted, do the exact opposite of all of this.
>Stay far out of melee
>impose disadvantage on self
>impose advantage on other targets (ideally not allies, but shared enemies. "let them fight")
>don't concentrate on things so you're a low value target
>don't deal sizeable direct damage so you're a low value target
>when targeted, make yourself nigh-impossible to hit
The new UA Origins grappling rules also makes grappling an easy aggro tool available to everyone.
Speaking of Armorer Thunder Gauntlets... I keep thinking about a multiclass investment of 3 levels into Ranger (a tad MAD) for Hunter. Getting Horde Breaker for an extra cleave-type attack without using any additional actions or bonus actions could be fun, spread that disadvantage debuff like a champ. You can use a shield to keep your AC high (always a magic shield with your infusions) and don't need a feat like Dual Wielder.
Is a tank build like this really needed in the average party? Probably not. Will you lag in damage compared to a better melee attacker or spell effectiveness compared to a Cleric? To be sure. Despite the disadvantages, I still think think it'd be a sweet build.
seems overkill to go hunter with horde breaker when you could be a fighter centric character "only" dipping artificer 3 with int 13, taking the duel wielder feat and the two weapon fighting style to allow you to use the bonus action to attack a third time with the thunder gauntlets, using action surge that is up to 5 targets marked in a single turn
@@finalfantasy50 really different vibe, tho. Fighter main with Armorer dip, vs Artificer main with Hunter dip. Having lots of spell options as a half caster would be really handy, plus infusions, and a bonus action to spend freely.
Not saying the fighter doesn't work, but that it offers a really different play style, different experience.
Yes, yes I can, when the enemy moves away from my barbarian sentinel (with a legendary action that lets them move without opportunity attacks) on the next round as I attack them I sing "captain plannet's in my spear gona stab the in the rear. Now my powers magnified and I'm gona do a genocide."
#1 should be proximity. Even if a ranged attack hits them hard, the fighter in their face is the more likely target.
I feel like we’re building towards an Ancestral Guardian barbarian who uses reckless attacks and then multiclassing into Warlock for AoA and scaling slots
Celestial Patron would have good synergy with their BA healing dice that are not spells and can be self used to keep tanking after AoA might go down too
10:19 Shouldn’t some of these passive disadvantage sources [ancestral guardians, unwavering mark, etc.] be a real time effect? Meaning that the affected creature would see that other creatures would be more challenging to hit prior to making their first attack?
Hello, have a nice day :)
I recently wrote an aggro spell for a book of spells Frog God Games is working on. I can’t talk about everything but I think it could be a good fit.
Good video!
I like to think that concentration spells physicaly give some clear clue that you are focusing on a spell. Maybe you are chanting something very low constantly, or holding a finger in the forehead or the temples, holding tight your shining holy symbol or arcane focus, so that the usual grunt will be able to tell who's concentrating. I mean, when players are under some concentration spell, it's the player turn and he ask "who's concentrating on this?" I see no problem telling them. Enemies should have that insight as well. I don't think that's metagaming.
I want to guess where it will go for the next vid.
Mark of Warding dwarf, cleric 1 with a heavy armor domain, and a fullcaster that gets extra attack. Knowign TM, most likely a bladesinger, because wizard, even if it means having no subclass untill level 7. Maybe picking up Heavy Armor master at wizard 4
It makes me wonder if you took a pre made campaign let your players minmaxed to their hearts content but told them all enemies will be fighting smart and to win within the frames of the rule, how well would they do.
Question: Would you take Blade Ward on the Armor of Agathys build? I’m at this decision point myself.
Letting the enemy hit, but do less damage, seems one useful way to keep aggro and keep the extra hit points and damage longer
i feel like the advantage on the reckless attack if the barbaian isnt the threat is bad metagaming depending on what monster your running
Spellcasters can avoid damage yes, the ones I play with just tend not to
So which spellcaster is the one getting the highest AC?
Poor Matt, he looks so evil here.
I try and think of how non-intelligent creatures (like beasts in the wild) would react v. intelligent creatures with a heavy bias towards convenience. Although, I do slightly disagree with your "orcs on the road" example, I don't think all 4 Orcs would attack the front-liner because they are intelligent and you'd imagine have some experience fighting adventurers. I'd have two run by and go for the people at the three at the backline while the other two flank the front-liner. I don't want the players thinking all it takes is putting a high AC/high HP martial character in the open to just magically suck in all attackers like a black hole. ;)
Goliath or hadozee clockwork sorcerer for armor of agagthys
Just cast Bane and have someone cast Mass Suggestion or Suggestion to force enemies to attack the tank.
15:10 Why would attacks have disadvantage "because they're in melee"
They're ranged spell attacks. I believe it's called Hurl Flame.
@@CJWproductions and?
@@CJWproductions Found the rule, I've never seen this played correctly, or mentioned in commonly misplayed rules videos.
Ranged Attacks in Close Combat
PHB p195
[-]
Aiming a ranged attack is more difficult when a foe is next to you. When you make a ranged attack with a weapon, a spell, or some other means, you have disadvantage on the attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature who can see you and who isn't incapacitated.
@@SpiderWaffle idk what to tell ya, everyone I've met has played with this rule
Brazilian being representes by the Brazuca guild! Yay 🤣😂😻
just annoy the DM, it usually works
Chars should be running at least half the time, if they are below 6th or 7th level, in real D&D.
Concentration baby
So now I am imagining a guy why just runs in and tries to tackle people, grappling them and throwing himself to the ground while hugging them painfully to death 😂
Me tank me aggro me RAGE
How to play good with AoA? Play as would be bad in normally
Hmm.... Play Paladin. Got it. 👍
:)
I think I'm gonna push back on the idea that DMs shouldn't expect to "Win combat." Sure, DMs aren't expected to achieve a TPK every time (or even achieving a TPK at all), but I think that just "reducing all enemies to 0 hit points" isn't really sufficient as a win condition, either for DMs or for players. This is just the nature of having two disparate roles in the game, that Players and DMs are both striving to achieve the same thing: reach the end of the campaign. Players try to reach that end by fighting enemies, exploring the world, and growing their character with their experiences, but DMs don't reach that end by doing the same thing. DMs are trying to provide *challenge* to the players, and to put barriers between the character and their ending, which means a successful encounter for a DM is usually one that gives players a significant hurdle to overcome. Combat can't be so easy that players feel like everything was designed for them to kill it, but they also can't be so difficult that the player could never hope to succeed.
This is where we come to another point: killing all enemies isn't the only win condition. In fact, that's usually the worst win condition to achieve, because it requires the use of the most party resources. Even if death is only a mistake that costs 300 gold and a 3rd level spell to reverse, a Diplomatic Victory, or even avoiding combat altogether through Stealth, are far more preferable in the long-term for players. Therefore, players who know, and are actively working towards these other win conditions, are technically winning, even though the DM isn't losing any creatures in the process. What matters is that the players feel as if they've overcome a challenge, and *how* they overcome that challenge just becomes a sematic issue.
Therefore, I would say that an encounter being both challenging, but defeated, means both the players and the DM won that encounter. DMs have the power to gauge the encounter, and set the level of difficulty however they like, so a DM that manages to find that sweet spot of difficulty is still winning, even though their creatures didn't.
answer is no. you can dance around it all you want but reality of dnd is that tanking is not a thing, and the game needs to do better fixing it without us having to do it
That's because if you drill all the way down, tank isn't a role. All 'tanks' are either control, support or DPS characters.
Your 'traditional' tank is the control tank. They're focussed on being sticky, enemies have a hard time moving away from them because of grapples, trips, etc. The easiest way to escape is to disable the tank. There's also the "all attacks against anyone but me are debuffed"-type control effects. All this does is control enemy movement and behaviour, fundamentally no different from dumping control spells on the field, though typically with less range and expending a different resource.
The support tank instead makes allies less appealing targets. This is your buff-aura tank or your attack-absorbing tank. It's difficult to do any meaningful damage to anyone else while they're alive. Fundamentally no different from your standard support-bot caster.
DPS tanks cover 2 distinct niches. The obvious is big threatening DPS characters that can afford to take a hit. The other type is mechanical jank where the DPS relies on getting hit to deal their damage.
In all of these cases, 'tanking' is incidental to the role. It generally just means the character has traded the range their role normally operates at for a survivability buffer. There is nothing that tanking uniquely offers.
Knock knock it's Ansestral Guardian Barbarian open up