Revisting this discussion.. the AI seems like the biggest cause in variance of a D&D game ran by a DM. "Nudge the nice" was mentioned earlier, but ultimately what I see the computer do is what we call "metagaming" in D&D. Lets say I know the AC of a particular monster, so I know which monsters i am more likely to land a Great Weaponmaster strike against... I also know when to give up trying the GWM attacks if the AC is 19 or over because im likely to miss more oftren. The computer seems to focus target based on the easiest target to kill. Which is fair in a video games, it makes sense to put the monsters on equal grounds as the players, you dont want the game being stupid easy. However a lot of times in pencil and paper games, the DM is simply not telling you the HP of the baddies. So the playground is leveled in the opposite direction. The player has to lookup the statblocks themselves if they want to know the HP and AC(and then they take it a step further and know which spell saves are most likely to hit). So the players may even waste a high damage spell on a low HP target but at the same time, the DM doesnt break immersion by having the monsters attack somewhat randomly (changing targets and such) as often they are attacking the closes thing to them, or something that has pissed them off recently or some story driven character selection motivation.

I think a with a 5e ruleset its all or none. They can homebrew in some content but we really shouldnt see HP of baddies, just general health appearance (Fine, bruised, bloodied, Deaths door). Likewise, the AI should not target based on HP unless its by the same tiered standard (taht dudes on deaths door, maybe i can finish him). Rather than the current (that wizard is in perfect health but has the lowest HP, maybe I will kill him first)

Last edited by pill0ws; 18/10/20 04:28 PM.