I'd have to say that my answer to these questions is ultimately - It Depends. I try to get a feel for how the individual creature or creature type would behave. A wily predator with an animal-level intelligence may be more inclined to avoid AoO than a (theoretically) smarter goblin full of his own enthusiasm for vandalism and an soft target in view.
In other words, it's less about an intelligence score and more about the motivations for the creature. Most predators, for example, try to conserve their energy and strike when they have an advantage rather than give up free attacks or engage in useless activity. Their normal circumstances (surviving by obtaining kills that are by no means automatic) punish that behavior far too much. With that in mind, very few natural creatures would position themselves to maximize AoO chances. It's just not in the mindset to inflict as much injury as possible or control the battlefield. That's more the stuff for a well-trained creature with a lot of self-confidence in his defenses, stamina, or allies because if he can maximize his AoO chances, he's probably also maximizing the enemies' chances to get at him as well and won't last long without a good reason to have that confidence.
Creative Director
|
Since most monsters are only "on screen" during combat... for most monsters, combat is the only chance you get to inject their personalities. So varying the tactics for them is a good thing; even among equal-Intelligence foes, some might be braver than others, some more foolish than others, some more showboaty than others... there shouldn't be a single set of tactics for every creature.
For our adventures, we include a "TACTICS" section in full stat blocks that's tailored to each monster in each encounter, which includes how they behave before and during combat, as well as morale information for when they flee or submit. If you're doing extensive prep for a game, it can help to do the same for your creatures, because that sets up their baseline tactics and combat personality BEFORE the PCs arrive. If every monster just reacts the same to the PCs' standard tactics... that can get old and repetitive. Having some monsters that periodically fight SUPER efficiently and use lots of tactics is fun... but it's just as fun to have other monsters fight with TERRIBLE tactics due to overwhelming bravery or foolhardiness.
I use more than just their Intelligence to determine their tactics. I do like to start there though.
Int 0: Follows preprogrammed instructions. The creature uses no tactics unless it is part of the instructions. For example, if the creature has power attack for some reason, then it will always use power attack.
Int 1-2: Uses instincts. It will generally attack the creature that attacked it last but may focus on one opponent under some circumstances. A lion will usually focus on the smallest or weakest looking opponent but won't hesitate to defend itself. If it feels that it can grab the halfing monk and run away with its meal, it may ignore the other creatures attacking it so it can do so.
Int 3-5: Uses some tactics. They may not use the best tactics all the time. If the creature has power attack, it may start with that even if the opponent is wearing heavy armor. These creatures may change their tactics based on emotion rather than rational thought. For example, a chimera may attack the smaller party members not because it thinks they are easier targets but because it fears the larger ones. So it may attack a gnome fighter in full plate before attacking the half-orc wizard.
Int 6-8: Uses some thought with its tactics but generally starts with what has worked in the past even if the situation isn't the same. So a hill giant will usually open with power attack and cleave even though it puts him at a disadvantage with his AC. He may change that as the fight continues but round one is not always the best open for him.
Int 9-11: These creatures fight the way most creatures will. They don't have a lot of surprise maneuvers unless they have taken feats for that. They may get desperate and try something they don't know but they weigh the pros and cons as best they can.
Int 12+ The smarter the creature, the more it changes its tactics based on the situation. I usually take a few extra moments to figure out what I want them to do, and the smarter they are the more time I take as GM to determine their actions. I usually take a few seconds per Intelligence bonus. So a creature with a 20 Intelligence might get 15 seconds of extra thought from me as GM to determine its actions.
These aren't carved in stone rules. I look at the creatures' Wisdom and personalities as well. I look at any classes they have and try to take that into account as well.
I think that you will do fine as long as you play the dumber creatures with fewer tactics than the smarter creatures.
At what level of INT do you expect monsters to:
Depends on much more than int in many cases. Especially fighting, one of the most basic skills a creature can have, is something many creatures know by instinct.
Animals, having int 1 or 2, often have fighting styles that are very effective.
The trick is that they're effective against their traditional enemies. And it's that effective because they got to learn - and, more importantly, evolve a good instinct - over lots and lots of generations. Those who didn't know how to fight their usual prey or predators tended to be unavailable to the gene pool due to death (either starvation or being food).
So wolves who have always hunted deer will be quite good at hunting deer.
What they're not good against is rhinoceroses. When they face an enemy against which their traditional tactics are useless, they tend to be a lot less effective. Less intelligence means less adaptivity.
Avoid AoO?
1, and sometimes -. In most cases. Negative reinforcement is quite effective as a learning tool. Most critters will have a basic understanding of movement that doesn't expose them unnecessarily.
But depending on what they usually fight against, they might not avoid all kinds of AoO. For example, a critter that is used to fighing medium enemies (or "long" large ones) will probably avoid running circles around an enemy (since that provokes AoOs), but they will not hesitate to close with an enemy, even if it has reach. They don't know how to react to it, and will repeatedly make that mistake.
They might also fall for Combat Expertise, since they're not used to an enemy that can react to several threats at once.
5-Foot step?
-, depending on the circumstances. A 5-foot-step to close with the enemy? That's not even a decision. It's just moving a bit towards the enemy so you can hit him. If the distance they have to cross is short enough, they won't provoke an AoO.
Moving away from someone to do something that provokes AoO, so they avoid that AoO? Should be a lot rarer, but if we're talking about inborn, racial abilities (like shooting tail spikes), it falls under the "negative reinforcement" rule and they might have learned that you can avoid pain by stepping away before attacking. Unless, of course, they have just learned not doing it at all in close range, falling back on mêlée attacks instead. And a golem or other mindless construct probably is programmed to step away.
However, they will probably be flustered if the enemy has Step Up and stays with them. They might shoot regardless, as the "step back and shoot" manoeuvre is instinctive.
Reposition to AoE the most people?
AoE abilities are quite rare for animal-level intelligence critters, so there might not be that much instinctive knowledge behind this. I guess many creatures know how to keep themselves out of the danger zone (unless it's something they're immune against) and pack hunters will know how to keep each other out of the heat, but otherwise, they might just go for the next best likely cluster of enemies.
Make use of combat maneuvers?
Again, a lot of instinctual stuff there. Wolves, for example will use trip simply because of their racial ability. They'll use it all the time. Grapple, bull rush and overrun are also often part of a creature's instinctive combat behaviour.
Target weakest and squieshiest person?
Target strongest and biggest threat?
Those I'd make completely situational. Some will always attack the closest threat. Or the enemy who hurt them most. Some will instead shy away from a significant threat. Some will target the enemy that looks weakest, while with others, the territorial instinct will kick in and they go for the biggest.
The "weakest", in this case might be the level 20 wizard instead of the level 1 warrior. Until the guy obliterates half the pack by breathing fire, they will not realise that he's not really the most defenceless and powerless target. Even a fireball or something like that might not make them learn, as they might not realise that it's his doing.
Now, this is a lot about critters of low intelligence which aren't smarter because they depend on instinct.
Most of that doesn't really apply to the average civilised humanoid. They often don't have a good inborn fighting instinct. Their natural weapons are just ridiculous. When they fight, then usually with sword and/or spell, and you have to train that stuff.
There, intelligence will help a lot adapting to differences.
I'd personally say that those of, say, int 9 and below (or maybe just 7 and below) aren't even capable of innovation. They will try the most basic method of fighting. If that works out well enough, they stick with it. If not, they might randomly try variations. Not really innovative stuff, like advanced positioning to generate flanking opportunities the enemy can't get out of.
They might get training for advanced techniques, but they'll employ them without much thought, and no adeptness for adaptation. Put them on the wrong end of the phalanx and they don't know how to behave, that sort of thing.
However, they will learn like animals, and if their int is higher than that of animals, they will learn faster than animals. If they find out that trying to run right past an armed enemy to get behind him will earn you pain, they will avoid it. Eventually, they'll learn to keep their distance until they close in for the kill.
Archers will know not to shoot when enemies are too close. They will probably know that step back trick, but you'll really ruin their concentration with step up.
So basically, the higher the experience (which I'd tie to BAB when it comes to tactical combat with weapons, and maybe caster level when it comes to spellcasting), the more basic knowledge do they have despite their low intelligence. It's probably best to take a moment and consider their basic techniques, what they know and what they don't. If confronted with something they don't know, less intelligent enemies will have a harder time adjusting.
To me it would make sense that a raging creature would not 5 foot step to hit extra people in a cone attack. The 5 foot steps in general seem like a more complicated strategy where many creatures would either stay stationary if there was a target there or make a committed move.
While I agree that making a 5 foot step to hit more people may be a bit much to expect from a creature with a very low intelligence, I wouldn't make the logical leap into 5 foot steps being any kind of complicated strategy. Just think of it as a minor shift of location that happens as the combatant moves around to try to get a better attack and then it doesn't have to require any sort of complicated thinking.
|
I feel that the grasp monsters have on tactics is a mix of perceiving threats and remembering previous successful and failed courses of actions. Thus it falls under both the WIS (Perception) and INT (Memory) aegis.
Maybe using the average of both would be better. And then you will quickly realize that most monsters have good WIS bonus.
But of course, we are only talking about the monsters here. Not about the maximized PC who knows all the best tactics inside out, even with a 7 in both WIS and INT...
A cat has 2 intelligence. I challenge anyone to catch a cat that doesn't want to be caught, even with help. It's not easy. They make preemptive decisions to avoid being surrounded or cornered. It's possible you could make one zip by you, offering an attack of opportunity as it were, but only when there are no other paths immediately available. One could argue the cat uses something like acrobatics to get through threatened areas untouched, as they may bounce off something not normally intended for movement or squeeze through a narrow opening at nearly full speed.
Also, cats (sorry, I spend too much time around them) are a good representative of held actions. Sometimes they'll sit and wait for minutes on end for a good chance to pounce. Even a preying mantis, which has an int of 0, is famous for its ability to wait for an ideal time to strike.
If you've ever seen one larger animal fighting off several smaller animals, I think it's safe to say they know how to use the fighting defensively method, too. There is posturing and calculation involved that attempt to stave off attacks and avoid undue risk.
In this sense, I'd say it's not unrealistic for common animals to employ advanced behaviors, even things like withdrawal actions or combat maneuvers. Don't forget, wolves get a free trip, but certain other animals might try to trip as well. As a GM, you could even say that a downed animal's flails to get back up generate the equivalent of a trip attempt as they collide with the character's legs. An ape or elephant might have the sense to grab the weapon that's been hitting it and try to disarm it.
Animals, however, can't make complex decisions like humanoids can. A human may realize that a CR 10 wizard is far more dangerous than a CR 3 ogre, but the animal is almost certainly going to look at the ogre as a bigger threat, literally. Depending on the situation, a GM might have an animal run if something big or bad enough enters the fray, even if it were an illusion.
Ultimately, it comes down to a creature's disposition and natural function. Predators aren't intellectual geniuses, they're just adept at combat and have the ability to calculate risks and make efficient snap decisions. At the same time, if one impulse overrides another, such as fear or pain, their decisions may change.