Ummm, did I mention anything about lowest AC, or acid arrow? No I don't think I did. But I'm going to humor you
I'm boggled by one of the posts how does a gnoll get it's hands on an acid arrow. that just using an arrow should be the limit of it's intellegence.... that boggles me
Please don't attack me for quoting you. I don't necessarily disagree with you that a creature with int of 6 should be able to use an acid arrow, but claiming you "never mentioned anything about...acid arrow" is disingenuous.
And true, you didn't explicitly mention AC, but others in this post have. The enemy AI prioritizing our squishies, often completely ignoring the fighter with the sword in front of their face, is very relevant to this topic on battles. On the one hand, it is interesting to fight against a smart enemy. On the other, we want our fighter/tank to be able to pull aggro and do their job protecting our mages. I was suggesting a balance, where some encounters are against enemies that allow our fighter to shine, while others are against smarter enemies that are more difficult.
Then there is fact that not all gnolls have an int of 6, just like all humans dont' have an int of 10.
Somewhat fair point. Gnoll Pack Lords have ints of 8 and gnoll fang of yeenoghus have ints of 10. Plus there is spread for individuals. But most gnolls DO have intelligence under 10 whereas most (or the average) humans have intelligences of 10 in this world.
Now, you also have a lot of points about using Intelligence vs Wisdom to determine tactics and how smart the enemy is in combat, which are good points. There is a lot of overlap between those 2 stats and this discussion can apply generally, and not just to gnolls. So sure, I'd be fine if the average of wisdom and intelligence determined how smart the enemy AI was. I just want the game to be in a state where not every single enemy knows exactly which of my party members has the lowest AC and focuses entirely on them.
As for the attack it wasn't really, it was me being my mix of sarcasm, and odd humor. Much like someone rubbing their hands together irl, in anticipation of percieved bout for whatever reason. I try to rein it in, but sadly as you can tell I fail at times. Case in point telling my kids i'll kick the white out of them. 'despite what others may think I wouldn't kick them, let alone try to kick the white out of them. One it's impossible to kick the color out of anything. Then there is the one that went horribly wrong, but truelly epic. I told my then five year old "if you feel froggy, just jump' she responded by ribbiting and hoping around the entire house. So you see it's my nature to say things like this, and in your place I'd of put. 'Stop being an ass, Clavis.' then moved on as you did. Now then lets put on the gloves. (j/k should prolly add this to most of what I say, and text, and everything else, just a bother.)
I honestly didn't read through the whole thing and was only commenting about their ability to use arrows, bows, and have basic tactics. Nothing else. True about the ignoring things, I to would like to be able to be able to pull aggro. yet currently do to level cap there is not many ways to do so. Shield expert is one, also sentinel?? I think it's called is a feat that allows you to stop enemy movement if you hit them. Unsure if it's in EA or not, I find that some of the feats should be subclass features (there are some subclasses that do, just not the ones in EA. I believe not 100% sure) at times it sucks to have to build your fighter around such things, but it's part of D&D and 5e.
Next point I actually agree with... your making it hard for me to be a dick btw with your logic!! This usually is up to the DM and I"ve had a couple that would always go for my parties squishies. Though in the game, it is a valid tactic to go for them rather then your heavily armored person. It's honestly what I would do, from standard that it's going to be harder to take down shiny man, versus soft man.
correction shield expert is wierdly worded to me for some reason. It implies disadvantage if your near an enemy who attacks an ally? or is it if your near an ally enemies get disadvantage if they attack they ally. My brain isn't wrapping around that one again.
