Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Why Keep Attacking the Fallen?

So I have a huge issue with how the enemy AI targets downed companions.

*Rant*
It's just stupid. Especially when Gale goes down and gets turned into a pincushion. Guy turns necrotic and can lay waste to my entire team if we are too close. (Nearly did the first time it happened, would have been nice to have a little heads up before the black death started billowing out from his corpse, geez)

If they are down, why keep attacking? Why would you not focus on the immediate threat that's standing LITERALLY right next to you?

Also why is the AI setting it's priority attacks on my wizard, CONSISTANTLY?? First few attacks, it's Gale. Half the battle is trying to keep him out of harms way and alive so he doesn't kill us all and surprisingly he is the one who has most of his spell slots at the end since he did more running and dying than damage!!
*End Rant*

Ahem...

Larian can you advise?

Because they arent acting like goblins(or w/e)... they are mob metagaming?...(wrong term perhaps)... they see it as more important to make you use certain resources, than to win that particular fight... very selfless of them really... ;D

...some will lineup to justify it. This is usually where the DM would have the mob go onto another player though, yes...

EDIT.. starving beast/etc aside...

I agree, the AI goes out of its way to target spellcasters first and then keep kicking them when they're down, rather than deal with other threats. Doesn't make sense to me. Until your wizard lets fly with a spell, how do they know it's a spellcaster (and therefore dangerous)? It could be a merchant, in which case dealing with the obviously armed and dangerous fighters first would make more sense.

Agreed fully!!!

AI goes for casters, bcs they usualy have lowest AC ... and therefore they have simply bigest change to sucess their attack.
Its just as people say: "kick where it hurts mostly" simple as that.

Its quite logical when you think about it, what sentient or at least semi-sentient creature would attack plated dude with tower shield ... when next to him is another dude in cloth robe?

Agreed that there should be another targeting mechanism for beasts, wich should simply attack closest enemy, bcs they usualy cant understand defences of their enemies ... but that is different topic.


And for you second question ... why they keep attacking downed character?
Well, either once aggain, lowest AC ... therefore bigest change to hit ... therefore most effective strike.
Or, bcs if they would ignore them, your party will be litteraly unstoppable.

I just wish they'd kill whoever was downed sooner. It's like going up against a boxer who turns his back to you mid fight to punch the air.

Yeah the AI is notable behaving irrationally in order to get one complete kill in.

I dunno how many enemys are smart enough to go for the soft, squishy robe instead of the Shield and Metal.
But there is a visibly observable favour of the AI to go for the target with the lowest Armorclass.

Actually there is a reason for it and this is a thing that BG3 can learn from Solasta -- there should be a pop up with your successful vs unsuccessful saving throws. When you fall, you get three death savings throws to avoid being becoming dead, dead. Every time someone pounds on your unconscious body that counts as a failed savings throw. So the enemies are being really nasty to make sure you don't come back to hit them with a fireball

(and I've said this many times but I'll say it again, the AI is wrong, geek the mage is class RPG strategy but under the current hybrid rules it doesn't apply. Enemies should focus on the thief and battlemaster)

edit: didn't see others had already answered. Yep going for complete kill.

During the infamous Minotaur fight, one of big bad Mooo boys knocked my Gale down, making him fall down like 15 m (and this resulted in Gale being incapitated). Then next minotaur decided to jump down on him aaandd suprisingly in next turn the other big bad guy did the same, dealing like 30+ damage to his friend and making the poor wizard fail another save from death roll. No wonder that while Gale did die in the end, resulting fight was beyond easy because one of enemies was at half health for free, with both of them put at disadvantaged situation (and a bit of free damage thanks to Necrotic Aura). It's just too easy to cheese, many times enemies put themselves in really tough tactical situation just to get that 1 hit on our favourite spellcaster.

Or another situation:
A Githyanki rushing to ladder, forcing 2 Attacks of Opportunity on him from my Cleric PC and Lae'zel, climbing the said ladder, losing 3/4 of his health just to get shoved down to his death in next turn by Astarion. It's definetely not a metagaming move at this point, trading a single failed death save roll for one of fighters... Neither does it make any sense from lore standpoint.

I am pretty sure though it's purerly EA issue, DoS II had AI personalities as far as I am aware, not to mention AI will surerly improve with the development of the game.

Or even regardless of what AC the already downed target may have....

i could certainly see many a monster generally go for that guy in robes first.. but after down would he still go for them while another character is still an active threat to them?... could probably get crazy with it i suppose...

Most RPG's you tend to go for the spell casters first - I guess most enemies/monsters who have some knowledge of the damage wizards/magic users can cause would tend to try to get rid of them asap - but yes once they are unconscious or damaged beyond the point of being a threat any semi intelligent life form would move onto the threats still standing (rather than flogging the proverbial dead horse or mage in this case)

I dont believe this is really a major - behind the scenes I think Larian will tweak this as part of the overall balancing/difficulty modes in the final version.