Some questions on monster behaviour during combat

[farinal]

There are many monsters that have powerful abilities that they can use with using hate points but I want to ask you people how often do you use them? As a LM, how often your monsters use hate? Do you always use them up until they are finished? How often should a monster use hate?

Another question, when a monster has favoured skill or weapon, and uses hate for his roll, what bonus other than attribute level do you add?

[Michebugio]

My advice is: roleplay the monster, and don't be too much "tactical".

A dumb monster (trolls) should use all the Hate immediately, since he's not smart enough to use it when really needed. Also, he is istinctive, and hopes to finish off his enemies early.

A "grunt" monster (common orcs, wargs) shouldn't use Hate unless their life is seriously at risk, so they'll use Hate to fight more desperately when combat is going bad for them.

A "boss" monster is the only monster that should make clever use of its Hate points. Also, if he's commanding lesser troops, he should use Hate mostly to survive, or increase the power of a blow only when there's a good chance to easily eliminate a player from the fight.

Finally, of course, monsters should keep at least 1 Hate point to avoid being WEARY, unless that point would really mean the difference between a win or a lose.

[DavetheLost]

Many, if not most. Monsters in Middle Earth seem to fall within the bounds of human intelligence. Some are dimmer, some are brighter.

I tend to play them as above.

[fbnaulin]

Finally, of course, monsters should keep at least 1 Hate point to avoid being WEARY, unless that point would really mean the difference between a win or a lose.

"The Loremaster is entitled to make use of a special ability even when it requires the expenditure of the last Hate point possessed by the creature." (LB 66).

English is not my native language, so I can't interprete the subtleness of this sentence (especially the word 'entitled'). But it seems to me that this declaration is there in the book to provoke Loremasters to use last Hate point, no matter if the creature becomes Weary or escape (Craven) as result.

Possibly I'm wrong.

[Yusei]

It means you are allowed to spend Hate a you wish, even the last point. But you can decide not to.

I am reluctant to spend the last point for craven creatures.

[Corvo]

After some doubts, I decided that monsters should spend their hate liberally, to the point they are weary and craven.
My reasoning is that Heroes cannot choose if and when they are tired. Heroes can start the combat already fatigued, while monsters are always fresh and dandy. The heroes can start a fight already depleted of Hope, while monster can't.
To use AngelaLex words, looks like fatigue rules are created to screw the PCs.

I want the players understand that goblins are craven -otherwise they looks stalwart as Uruk- or that the Troll is exhausting himself -so when that Big Bad isn't tired at all, they appreciate that that guy is really different-.
The only way to show this is spending liberally the Hate points.

[Angelalex242]

Exactly so. Monsters should essentially be played as Kamikazee warriors who want only to kill PCs and spend every drop of Hate they've got trying to do so, for they know there's 500 more of them waiting to wear PCs down.

Sauron's big strategy here is "I have reserves." If you kill the first 500 orcs, that's okay, he's got 5000 more where that came from. So his plan is to have the first lines of troops kill as many as they can before they inevitably get killed. In fact, their getting killed is part of his plan.

Guys like Aragorn even KNOW that's Sauron's strategy. "We could slay 10 times the number of losses we take and still rue the exchange" he says.

[Corvo]

Put in another way: monster's weaknesses like "Craven" are a descriptions of the monster's behavior. If we sidestep these weaknesses for tactical's sake, we are distorting the monster's behaviour to screw the players.

Likewise, a monster with low Hate but juicy powers like "Horrible Strenght" is a monster prone to exhausting himself quickly.

[DavetheLost]

When I say that most creatures encountered as foes seem to be of roughly human intelligence it is worth considering how humans have behaved in combat. Some are craven and flee at the first chance, some stand fast to the last, are driven forward, some advance through peer pressure.

Most are too busy trying to kill the enemy while avoiding being killed themselves to worry much about resource management (whether that be bullets or hate points).

Orcs and Goblins seem very willing to charge in and press the foe as long as they have numbers on their side. They don't seem to pay much attention to the combat prowess of the foe. Orcs might not start spending Hate until they feel themselves pressed, but once they do start I expect they spend it pretty freely.

[Michebugio]

Put in another way: monster's weaknesses like "Craven" are a descriptions of the monster's behavior. If we sidestep these weaknesses for tactical's sake, we are distorting the monster's behaviour to screw the players.

I partially disagree. "Craven" is the kind of weakness that could be exploited by players, using the intimidation action in combat, with no need for it to be necessarily exposed by the LM.
If you "want the players understand that goblins are craven", don't make it obvious from their behaviour. I would require the application of a Trait, or a Knowledge check, for the players to know if a creature is prone to "craven", so they can exploit it at their advantage. Thus the players will also feel rewarded for finding the monster's weakness.

A monster weakness IMHO is something the character have to discover and make use of, not to be revealed by LM unless in very particular circumstances.

My reasoning is that Heroes cannot choose if and when they are tired. Heroes can start the combat already fatigued, while monsters are always fresh and dandy. The heroes can start a fight already depleted of Hope, while monster can't.

I think that making comparisons between monsters and players may lead to wrong considerations: while Hate is more or less the equivalent of Hope points, it's a whole different thing. Monsters have, usually, lower scores of Hate than player's Hope.

And the monsters aren't necessarily "always fresh and dandy": think about their stats as the average condition in which you may find them, not the top condition they'll ever be. Maybe an orc soldier's Endurance isn't 12: it could be higher (say, 20), but usually you'll meet them already a bit tired and bruised by their violent and brawny lifestyle. The same can be said for their Hate: maybe they've already spent a lot, in past fights. But the average orc soldier will have just 1 point left.

And if they're intelligent, they are also pretty much aware of their "Craven" trait, so it's unlikely that they will expose themselves voluntarily to such a weakness, unless that really means the difference between life and death. I agree that monsters are essentially "kamikaze", but that doesn't mean that they'll waste their combat efficiency just because they know they will die: on the contrary, they will try to maximize it, trying to stay as much efficient as possible until hewed by player character.