SuperFieroStatus said:
Once again I want to thank everyone for all of their help. This forum has already served as an invaluable tool and I really appreciate how helpful and cool everyone is.
Another question I forgot to ask...how do you choose what your enemy NPCs attack in combat? Logic may dictate that they should all gang up on anyone enhancing the party (provided they understand what the hell the Psyker is doing chanting all that gibberish), or maybe even the guy with the biggest gun. I mean, my party is smart enough to gang up on the "boss", knowing that he is the biggest threat. But how can this issue be resolved? This is also barring examples where the enemy wouldn't know who is strongest (like an animal or a particularly dull gangster) in which case I just roll to see who the enemy attacks first.
So with "smart" enemies...
On one hand the enemy should be smart enough to know who the biggest threat is, and attack accordingly. If there is a boss, he should even rally his warriors to attack the same target (except in strategic situations). I know my own players will do that. But this makes my stronger combat players constantly targetted.
On the other hand, if I randomize it all, and have the enemies switch targets often for seemingly illogical reasons, it eliminates this sort of anti-favoritism but brings forth stupid enemies. I feel as though my players would see what I'm doing and think "Pfft...he just wants to make sure John doesn't die", in turn partially trivializing any threats they encounter.
How do your "smart enemies" choose their targets? Should I have a constant list of criteria for this? I mean if I had to I guess I would come up with some excuses for random target changes as to not eliminate the sense of threat during combat. But how many until they get ridiculous?
Okay, here's how I do it. Mooks, or general riffraff to blow though, I roll a die randomly to determine, unless someone has injured either the attacker or someone the attacker is near. Then I attack the person who inflicted the injury. If there is a clear, immediate threat, they attack the clear, immediate threat (the cleric screaming prayers to the emperor as he rushes with a chainsword brandished). They will also follow a big bad evil guy (BBEG)'s directions. I will not roll on the critical damage chart. As soon as anyone inflicts critical damage, the mook is down. Death, while always a possibility, is unlikely in these encounters. They serve to make characters feel competent in combat and to slow down players.
Professionals (cops, whatnot). First few turns they'll gang up on whoever looks like the biggest potential threat. They will gang up on the psyker (this is a well known threat to magic users in general. It's called "GEEK THE MAGE FIRST!"), or barring that, will assault whomever appears to be the leader of the combat. They will gang up and it will require team tactics to overcome. They will also use cover. I will occasionally use the critical chart depending on how gory I need the game to be. Death is a significant possibility, but is avoidable with effort.
Significant threats: Commandos, assassians, seasoned veterans. These people are capable of everything the PCs are. I will use tactics the PCs have used against them. I will ambush. I will geek the psyker first. I will use hit and run tactics. I will retreat to better combat ground. I will use critical hit charts and will generally be as evil and deceptive and vicious as I can. They will use communication, ideally private coms, to coordinate group attacks against the PCs. They will use mooks generally, moreso to give the players the feeling that they're making some progress against the baddies while they slowly wear down the veterans. Big Bad Evil Guys usually qualify in this range. Player deaths are likely without some really good tactics. I *might* introduce guys of this caliber once per adventure. They are a climax encounter.
