PDA

View Full Version : Tanks need more threat generating tools



Jerevon
02-23-2008, 07:33 PM
In another thread I mentioned that maybe shield bash could increase threat, but I don't think that's going to work.

Right now we've got the intimidate system - I like it - and the Maul of Malice. The Maul of Malice has a unique property on it: Incite +20%. Basically it increased the threat from melee attacks by 20%. This property is cool, but I think we should have it incorporated into Intimidate or a new ability - we shouldn't be restriced to a maul if we want to boost threat. Casters do 1600+ points of damage and they pull agro all the time. Asking them to hold still while we hit the target isn't going to work. "Go reroll an intimitank" isn't going to work either. Tanks need more ways to generate threat plain and simple. A system that trades AC or damage or attack bonus for threat isn't going to work either, we need all of that up to where it is in the middle of a fight. What I can see being feasable is a system that takes, say, half of total Diplomacy for +to incite when activated; the higher the skill, the more +to incite. Since we're trying to incite threat upon the target, we're not being very Diplomatic, right? Ok, the problem with that is fighters don't have a very high Diplomacy skill to beging with, so the trade isn't very balanced or good. So, what we can do is have a system that looks at Diplomacy and Intimidate and determines which is higher. If Diplomacy is higher, use half of the total score and translate that to a +to incite percentage. If it's 10, then +10% to incite. If the Intimidate is higher, use half of the Intimidate score and do the same thing. All of this threat generating should stack with intimidate if the roll is good too.

It's something of a drawn out idea, but I'm throw some ideas out there because tanks really need something more than Intimidate, a lot more.

[Edit]
There shouldn't be a skill trade, just used for calculations.

LOUDRampart
02-23-2008, 08:08 PM
I've found when intimidate works, it work great. But you have to learn to use it. My suggestion is that the range of intimidate be extended.

LOUDRampart
02-23-2008, 08:10 PM
Hmmm... repeat post so I removed it

Jerevon
02-23-2008, 08:21 PM
That would be good too. I was also kind of wanting to see a single-target system to generate threat, where it would be more than intimidate.

Also, you know what would be really cool? A full skill respec.

Hey Fred......you busy? I got an idea.....

Vormaerin
02-23-2008, 08:27 PM
D&D fighters are not "Tanks" in the MMO sense. Threat generation isn't their schtick. They are a DPS class. I know that a lot of folks play other MMOs and are used to the "Tank-Nuker-Healer" trinity, but that's not what D&D is about. You can play the game that way if you want.. it works okay if everyone in your group agrees to it.... but I don't think the Devs should be adding concepts fundamentally alien to D&D to the game without very good reason.

Having Intimidate and Diplomacy be aggro control skills at all is a huge change from their function in the base game (Intimidate in combat is a debuff skill, not a threat generator and Diplomacy has no combat application).

Tenkari_Rozahas
02-23-2008, 08:57 PM
Roll up a WF and get that maul with the WF brute fighting enhancmenet and that should generate a lot of hate.

Jerevon
02-23-2008, 09:10 PM
D&D fighters are not "Tanks" in the MMO sense. Threat generation isn't their schtick. They are a DPS class. I know that a lot of folks play other MMOs and are used to the "Tank-Nuker-Healer" trinity, but that's not what D&D is about. You can play the game that way if you want.. it works okay if everyone in your group agrees to it.... but I don't think the Devs should be adding concepts fundamentally alien to D&D to the game without very good reason.

Having Intimidate and Diplomacy be aggro control skills at all is a huge change from their function in the base game (Intimidate in combat is a debuff skill, not a threat generator and Diplomacy has no combat application).

How the hell can they be a DPS class with casters doing four-figure damage, in one normal hit, with ranged spells. How.

No, all tanks need to pick up threat better then it is working now and I already have the maul of malice, I want more intimidate or threat generating.

MyloInKY
02-23-2008, 09:16 PM
Roll up a WF and get that maul with the WF brute fighting enhancmenet and that should generate a lot of hate.

Yeah from the clerics!

Angelus_dead
02-23-2008, 09:18 PM
In another thread I mentioned that maybe shield bash could increase threat, but I don't think that's going to work.
There are two fixes DDO needs to address this problem.

1. Increase the threat generated by tanks, by allowing melee attacks to strike a running monster.
2. Decrease the threat generated by casters, by re-pricing the Maximize and Empower feats to something reasonable.

There, that would solve most everything. But here are more fixes, just for fun:

3. Add a feat called "Grab" or "Stand Still" to anyone with BAB1+. It works like Trip, except that the DC is higher but the victim is still able to take actions like attacking and casting (just not walking or running). Conceptually this is a little bit of grappling. "Improved Stand Still" could be a regular feat.

4. Allow Paladins to spend an AP to train "Formal Challenge", an active enhancement which pulls aggro using an opposed diplomacy check (nonverbal creatures are immune, and nonlawful creatures get a bonus)

5. Allow player characters to respec their skill points. You should pay a pile of gold to a trainer, then re-choose all your skills starting from level 1 (which would mean stepping through 16 dialog boxes). Any intelligence increase from tomes would be retroactive (but increase from levelling would not). Using this option sets a lockout timer of multiple days to repeat it.

6. Fix magic items with "Fortification" not to have a percentage crit immunity. Instead use an opposed system, which I won't detail here, but which would make unarmored characters relatively more vulnerable.

Angelus_dead
02-23-2008, 09:19 PM
Roll up a WF and get that maul with the WF brute fighting enhancmenet and that should generate a lot of hate.
That maul is not a helpful way to generate more aggro. It's a red herring. The +10% aggro bonus from the maul is more than offset by the fact you're swinging a plain +5 weapon, which has more than a 10% damage reduction from other weapons the WF could be using.

Angelus_dead
02-23-2008, 09:27 PM
D&D fighters are not "Tanks" in the MMO sense. Threat generation isn't their schtick. They are a DPS class. I know that a lot of folks play other MMOs and are used to the "Tank-Nuker-Healer" trinity, but that's not what D&D is about.
That's partly true.

Prior to module 5's reducing metamagic prices, fighters and barbarians were damage dealers. Today they are not, except in extraordinarily rare circumstances like Arraetrikos.

But, you are right that DDO's warriors do not serve the MMO function of "hold aggro and get beaten while someone else kills this monster". At present, they serve little purpose.

Snoggy
02-23-2008, 09:41 PM
In another thread I mentioned that maybe shield bash could increase threat, but I don't think that's going to work.

Right now we've got the intimidate system - I like it - and the Maul of Malice. The Maul of Malice has a unique property on it: Incite +20%. Basically it increased the threat from melee attacks by 20%. This property is cool, but I think we should have it incorporated into Intimidate or a new ability - we shouldn't be restriced to a maul if we want to boost threat. Casters do 1600+ points of damage and they pull agro all the time. Asking them to hold still while we hit the target isn't going to work. "Go reroll an intimitank" isn't going to work either. Tanks need more ways to generate threat plain and simple. A system that trades AC or damage or attack bonus for threat isn't going to work either, we need all of that up to where it is in the middle of a fight. What I can see being feasable is a system that takes, say, half of total Diplomacy for +to incite when activated; the higher the skill, the more +to incite. Since we're trying to incite threat upon the target, we're not being very Diplomatic, right? Ok, the problem with that is fighters don't have a very high Diplomacy skill to beging with, so the trade isn't very balanced or good. So, what we can do is have a system that looks at Diplomacy and Intimidate and determines which is higher. If Diplomacy is higher, use half of the total score and translate that to a +to incite percentage. If it's 10, then +10% to incite. If the Intimidate is higher, use half of the Intimidate score and do the same thing. All of this threat generating should stack with intimidate if the roll is good too.

It's something of a drawn out idea, but I'm throw some ideas out there because tanks really need something more than Intimidate, a lot more.

[Edit]
There shouldn't be a skill trade, just used for calculations.

Interesting idea.

I think the simplest thing for the devs to do at this point (especially Post-Shroud) is to allow for Incite to be craftable on weapons. And then maybe even tinker around with an improved incite?

And maybe even a new feat that let's a tank get a second button to push when they raise level cap again.

That's the simple stuff. Your idea is far more elegant than that. But also trickier to implement. Still ... very creative. Kudos.

Borror0
02-23-2008, 10:09 PM
D&D fighters are not "Tanks" in the MMO sense. Threat generation isn't their schtick. They are a DPS class. I know that a lot of folks play other MMOs and are used to the "Tank-Nuker-Healer" trinity, but that's not what D&D is about. You can play the game that way if you want.. it works okay if everyone in your group agrees to it.... but I don't think the Devs should be adding concepts fundamentally alien to D&D to the game without very good reason.

Ok, this is silly.

DDO is an MMO, it's a video game. In PnP D&D, the DM decides who gets the hate. Here, the game has to base upon some sort of "logic". As a result, hate is decided by the damage dealt to the monster. Aggro management is very important skill to develop if you want to be an half decent rogue, which is not needed in PnP D&D. Since aggro management is present in DDO it may lead into tons of new development idea for the developers. Treason and Stubble Backstabbing I-IV come to mind.

While I'm not arguing the whole "Tank-Nuker-Healer" trinity, such of an analysis can be made in DDO. However, we must transform "Nuker" into "DPS" (Damage Per Second) to include melee damage fit in (Nuker carries a magic conotation in my mind). We must also transform "Tank" into "damage prevention/mitigation" and the term "Healer" into "Healing".

It is a given that a character will contribute in at least one of those three aspects and might even contribute to the three (think of a Battle Celric that throws Crowd-Control). It is possible for a character to contribute to none, in which case we could call him a "leech".

There is a rule to be respected for a quest to be completable:

Damage taken < Damage healed + Total HP

If a party takes more damage than they can heal they will die and run out of HP except if their total of amount of HP makes the difference. Example: Marcello, a level 16 barbarian, is attacked by a Twilight Scorpion. Marcello self heals with CSW potions for a total of 213 HP. The scorpion dealt Marcello 417 HP before he finally killed it. Marcello having more 400 HP and having healed of 213 HP survived he fight even though he couldn't have kept for much longer as the scorpion was dealing damage faster than Marcello could heal himself. Thankfuly, he had enough DPS to kill the monster fast enough.

Now, there are a few ways to acheive this:


DPS:

Basicly, it's the whole "what is dead cannot deal damage" philosophy. Pretty much what barbarians exel at. By increasing the amount of DPS in a party, mobs will die quicker and will, logicly, deal less damage. A party of "nuking" sorcerer is also this. They kill stuff before it can get to them (or at least have enough swings to kill them).


Healing:

This is the reason clerics are so popular. Too much damage dealt for the current healing? Well, let's increase the amount of healing. The dangerous side of increasing the healing is to reduce the amount of DPS under the minimum level needed (ie running out of healing at out point in the quest) as some clerics aren't DPS machines (I'm not saying all because some Blade Barier maniacs like Lysol, Stashlight and Alandale would make me lie on that one).


Damage mitigation/prevention: This is, by far, the most complex of the three and it is divided in two.


Damage mitigation is having tons of HP to ease the healers' job and this is what the term "Tank" is most used for in DDO, to refer to the High HP (melee) classes (because when we look at a Barbarian/Fighter/Paladin we will automaticly assume he has more HP than a Sorcerer. Of course, a 350 HP Sorcerer could make us wrong). If a party consist of too much "squishies" (low HP characters), then the party will be taking damage too fast for the healing to take place (ie if your character is killed in one hit, no healing is going to save him).


Damage prevention consists of anything that can stop any party member to take damage. It includes, but not limited to, Armor Class, Debuffing, Resist Energy, Protection from Energy, Displacement, Blur, high saving throws and Crowd-Control. If a mob is caught dancing to the bard's beat... well chances he isn't going to deal much damage (except that bug where mobs keep attacknig when paralysed, held, etc.)

The effect of the other damage prevention are quite obvious, Blur reduces melee damage by 20&#37;, Displacement from 50%, Protection from Energy may totally prevent all elemental damage if continuously spammed, Armor Class reduces melee damage from 0 to 95%, high saving throws may prevent all damage or reduce by half the damage of a spell or trap.

Again, the danger here is to sacrifice too much DPS for damage prevention and not being able to kill the mobs.. or take too long killing them with also of the danger of meeting too much Crowd-Control-immuned mobs (ie Red and Purple named).


Now, as to why all of this? Simple, never discredit a style of play because it ain't yours. Some of us like tanking, it's a way to complete like any other. We accomplish the same by intimitanking than Sorcerers and Wizards by throwing some Crowd-Control. It becomes truer and truer as mid-AC becomes more and more worthless as it means our AC blocks more and more damage. Maybe it is not part of the game DDO is based uppon (PnP D&D) but it is a major aspect created by adapting the game into a video game. Igoring simply because it is not part of PnP D&D would be like overlooknig the whole twitch aspect of DDO.

Vormaerin
02-23-2008, 10:27 PM
I didn't discredit tanking as playstyle. Heck, I have an intimitank paladin of my own and play a guardian in LotRO. I did try to discredit the idea that this game should have a bunch of threat generation tools added just because that's the a staple of other MMOs. I really don't think adding a whole string of taunts and +threat skills to the game is a good way to go. Intimidate and Diplomacy are far enough steps in that direction, IMHO.

Borror0
02-23-2008, 10:52 PM
I did try to discredit the idea that this game should have a bunch of threat generation tools added just because that's the a staple of other MMOs.

I agree with you in that aspect, adding a bunch of thread generation tools just because it's a stable of others MMO is wrong. However, we may look at it and ask ourselves "Would that improve DDO?", if the answer is yes then we may proceed and try to come up with a few ways to make these into DDO, ways that aren't a pain or that aren't taken from other MMOs "just because". DDO is a unique MMO as it differs from a lot of concepts seen in other MMOs.

I'm not advocating tons of tools added into the game, but as the OP pointed out, melee cannot out-damage a 571 Disentegrate or a 361 Cone of Cold. Their main advantage over caster is their increased toughness, however, except intimitank, no melee is going to pull the aggro away from a dedicated nuker. I often find myself "soloing" so quest segments on my Sorcerer for that reason. I get the aggro and then if I run for safety well the melees cannot keep up and hit the said monster... so I have to finish the mob off (not that it's an issue but I try to let them have soem fun...;)).

I believe than a revision of how aggro works at end-game is more than needed. Take a look at Stubble Spellcasting, 40&#37; off that 361 Cone of Cold for 10 APs!? C'mon.. it's a joke...


I really don't think adding a whole string of taunts and +threat skills to the game is a good way to go. Intimidate and Diplomacy are far enough steps in that direction, IMHO.

While I believe adding too much of them is bad, reworking the current ones and adding a few wouldn't hurt. I'm sure rogues would be more than happy of that one too.

And intimidate needs more lovin'. Bigger AoE and shorter cooldown have been asked many times, both for free or as enhancements (who should be given to class having the skill as a class skill). And where is Demoralisation? It is part of the PnP D&D and have been asked for many, many times. Barbarian have it as an enhancement, so don't say it is hard for them to code. It's supposed to all the time... are they scared it's overpowered?

Tenkari_Rozahas
02-23-2008, 11:21 PM
they wanna be able to keep their allies from being attacked? then they need to add knights to DDO >>

Jerevon
02-24-2008, 12:34 AM
I didn't discredit tanking as playstyle. Heck, I have an intimitank paladin of my own and play a guardian in LotRO. I did try to discredit the idea that this game should have a bunch of threat generation tools added just because that's the a staple of other MMOs. I really don't think adding a whole string of taunts and +threat skills to the game is a good way to go. Intimidate and Diplomacy are far enough steps in that direction, IMHO.

Ok, we don't need a whole compliment of agro tools added to the game; however, tanks (melee types) need a way to pull, or at least try to pull, agro off of everything - with a click. Look at other things that cannot be influenced. Giant rats: I throw down an intimidate - nothing. The caster throws down a fire wall - boom, a swarm of rats, for example, jump on top of the caster. It's to the point where it's like, dude, do that again and you're on your own. I can't pull agro off fast enough to get the immune-to-intimidate mobs to look at me. A +incite-like feat as a craftable property would be good, having it, or some of the examples that Angelus_dead mentioned, trainable at Ftr/Pal/Bar level 1 would be much better. The paladin's righteous ability in the enhancement list that increases threat costs valuable AP's that I need elsewhere for my build. I should get that for free.

KiwiPhil889
02-24-2008, 12:50 AM
.. the paladin enhancement used for just this reason??

Divine Righteouness?? (my lvl 6 paladin has it)it doubles the hate generated for 20 secs per shot.Number of times seems based on your CHA stat. Not sure if its stackable,but it is another tool for generating hate.

Aside from that, if you really want to generate hate? then werk on your intim skill. An intimitank can pull any aggro off any caster (for at least 6 secs lol) no matter how much damage the caster is doing, UNLESS its one of those unintimidatable mobs,then well?,s**t happens?.

Just thought i'd mention it,
Cheers

editted cuz i forgot about things like rats lol

Jerevon
02-24-2008, 12:59 AM
.. the paladin enhancement used for just this reason??

Divine Righteouness?? (my lvl 6 paladin has it)it doubles the hate generated for 20 secs per shot.Number of times seems based on your CHA stat. Not sure if its stackable,but it is another tool for generating hate.

Aside from that, if you really want to generate hate? then werk on your intim skill. An intimitank can pull any aggro off any caster (for at least 6 secs lol) no matter how much damage the caster is doing.

Just thought i'd mention it,
Cheers


I'm working on my intimidate skill. My main is a 28pt build a little over a year old. I'd like to have a full skill respec please. Divine Righteouness should be a free trainable at paladin lev 1 too.

villainsimple
02-24-2008, 02:12 AM
here's your solution...

Make Intimidate a clicky and a toggle.

While toggled anything you strike sets off a "burst" of intimidate. Think of it like your flaming axe setting off a fireball, minus the damage. Their hatred towards you would be based on that burst.

Your clicky would be single target and would provide immense threat.

Mad_Bombardier
02-24-2008, 09:01 AM
Intimidate works fine. *Maybe* it could use it's range increased a little. Bigger range could have feat cost of SF: Intimidate or a new "Improved Intimidate" feat.

Or the aggro drawing squishies could just learn to run THROUGH the melees/intimidaters instead of running in circles around them. "woo-woo-woo!" (http://www.threestoogesonline.com/woobwoob.wav)

Slayer918
02-24-2008, 09:58 AM
I'm working on my intimidate skill. My main is a 28pt build a little over a year old. I'd like to have a full skill respec please. Divine Righteouness should be a free trainable at paladin lev 1 too.

First, Divine Righteousness is based off of turn undead... which paladins dont get until level 4... Secondly why should it be free if a rogue has to pay for subtle backstabber which has the same intent in reverse?

Currently I'm not impressed with it but maybe I'll pick it up in mod 7 when the duration is increased to 1 min instead of 20 seconds.

bandyman1
02-24-2008, 11:21 AM
Intimidate works fine. *Maybe* it could use it's range increased a little. Bigger range could have feat cost of SF: Intimidate or a new "Improved Intimidate" feat.

Or the aggro drawing squishies could just learn to run THROUGH the melees/intimidaters instead of running in circles around them. "woo-woo-woo!" (http://www.threestoogesonline.com/woobwoob.wav)

If 80% of the fighters and barbarians in this game actully HAD skill points in intimidate woo-woo-woo!.

I say this all the time to clerics who complain when I'm spamming my rogues 38 diplo; If the tanks, who can't deal the DPS that the casters and I can, actually did something to make their character useful......:rolleyes:.

Invalid_86
02-24-2008, 08:51 PM
D&D fighters are not "Tanks" in the MMO sense. Threat generation isn't their schtick. They are a DPS class. I know that a lot of folks play other MMOs and are used to the "Tank-Nuker-Healer" trinity, but that's not what D&D is about. You can play the game that way if you want.. it works okay if everyone in your group agrees to it.... but I don't think the Devs should be adding concepts fundamentally alien to D&D to the game without very good reason.


Fighters in PnP also have attacks of opportunity, which are a great motivator for enemies to not just stroll around them to get at the guy in the back. If we had that here the strategies would be much different.

Vormaerin
02-24-2008, 09:13 PM
While I believe adding too much of them is bad, reworking the current ones and adding a few wouldn't hurt. I'm sure rogues would be more than happy of that one too.

And intimidate needs more lovin'. Bigger AoE and shorter cooldown have been asked many times, both for free or as enhancements (who should be given to class having the skill as a class skill).

Well, I do think a an Improved Intimidate type feat might not be a bad idea, just like there is improved Feint for bluff. More feats are rarely a bad thing. As long as we aren't going down the path of giving fighter aggro control as a class feature "just because."

*facetious mode on*
Anyway, I always figured that if the wizard maximizes and empowers everything, its because he wants the aggro. If he didn't, he'd have a crazy high diplomacy skill to use. :D

Oh, and rogues have intimidate as a class skill. Maybe the rogue love mod will give them some aggro grabbing enhancement options? And the paladins will get an "extra whinging and cowering" line to make their diplomacy even better. :p

Vormaerin
02-24-2008, 09:15 PM
Fighters in PnP also have attacks of opportunity, which are a great motivator for enemies to not just stroll around them to get at the guy in the back. If we had that here the strategies would be much different.

Nah, its just a great reason for the DM to give his baddies ranks in tumble.... As you learn playing ToEE, which despite its flaws, has a GREAT 3.5e combat engine.

Jerevon
02-24-2008, 10:57 PM
Fighters in PnP also have attacks of opportunity, which are a great motivator for enemies to not just stroll around them to get at the guy in the back. If we had that here the strategies would be much different.

Agreed, there would have to be some tweaking to make it work for this game, however. DDO isn't really turn-based. But, making an adaptation to that rule to bring it in would be a good addition to this. For example in WoW rogues have a disarm skill. It is greyed-out all the time (can't use) until they parry an attack, then it's available for about a one second window. It goes back to greyed-out if it isn't used in that window of opportunity. It has a cooldown too. I don't see why we can't bring something like that into this game.

Jerevon
02-24-2008, 11:02 PM
First, Divine Righteousness is based off of turn undead... which paladins dont get until level 4... Secondly why should it be free if a rogue has to pay for subtle backstabber which has the same intent in reverse?

Currently I'm not impressed with it but maybe I'll pick it up in mod 7 when the duration is increased to 1 min instead of 20 seconds.

It doesn't seem to be that good, divine righteouss that is. The cast time is too long and it would be better with a 3x the threat on top of a cha mod added in.

Hadrian
02-24-2008, 11:22 PM
We've gone a long way with this discussion, but I think maybe in the wrong direction. A lot of possible ways that DDO can change have been mentioned or even detailed, but they all seem to involve the melee class perspective on this.

Look at the original poster's example of why a melee class has no hope of getting aggro.


Casters do 1600+ points of damage and they pull agro all the time. Asking them to hold still while we hit the target isn't going to work.

Now, the first thing I thought was, don't open up with a huge nuke if you don't want to get aggro. It shouldn't be on the melee type to make up for bad play on the part of the sorcerer. If he opens up with a big blast and makes sure that aggro is his, he should be prepared to deal with it. If not, it was a mistake on his part, and we don't need a more robust aggro management system to make up for that. He just needs to learn how to play his class. If he can handle the aggro, then there is no problem.

I do not like the idea of being able to press a button and fix everything. That will just encourage careless casters.

Emili
02-24-2008, 11:42 PM
We've gone a long way with this discussion, but I think maybe in the wrong direction. A lot of possible ways that DDO can change have been mentioned or even detailed, but they all seem to involve the melee class perspective on this.

Look at the original poster's example of why a melee class has no hope of getting aggro.



Now, the first thing I thought was, don't open up with a huge nuke if you don't want to get aggro. It shouldn't be on the melee type to make up for bad play on the part of the sorcerer. If he opens up with a big blast and makes sure that aggro is his, he should be prepared to deal with it. If not, it was a mistake on his part, and we don't need a more robust aggro management system to make up for that. He just needs to learn how to play his class. If he can handle the aggro, then there is no problem.

I do not like the idea of being able to press a button and fix everything. That will just encourage careless casters.


Angelus_dead has his post correct though... as it stands this game no longer ressembles DnD in game play at all... ie.) I was in the vale the other day helping a caster get his rare nameds. One named Gnoll had over 3000hp, now then I can stand there wacking at him for 50-230 at a time, or the caster can give him two or three extreme blasts... there is no denying though that a Gnoll with 3000hp has that many hp clearly because of the inflated dps. The typical way I play my caster is to lay back toss cc down back up then blast from behind... that works with tank in group or not. Tanks as a CC type class really do not fit in DnD... PnP they are a dps class thier intimidation make things coward the difference here is that they fill less nitch then they do in PnP. There are other feats to a melee which are way more important then a skill such as intimidate.

Hadrian
02-24-2008, 11:59 PM
One named Gnoll had over 3000hp, now then I can stand there wacking at him for 50-230 at a time, or the caster can give him two or three extreme blasts... there is no denying though that a Gnoll with 3000hp has that many hp clearly because of the inflated dps.

This is a good example of what I mean when I say that I don't want the press of a button to solve the issue. You do have many options to deal with a situation like this. For example:

That gnoll is orange named. This means that most effects work on it.

1) Melees can control the fight by tripping the monster, in which case the casters can feel free to blast away with no risk. This isn't a taunt, but it is equally effective at keeping the caster safe from harm.

2) Melees can stun the target with a stunning blow if they have the feat or a weighted weapon. This will allow them to land a critical hit on every swing, opening the option to use a big two-hander or a basic puncturing weapon of any kind to quickly dish out lethal damage.

3) The fighter can use a vorpal, making the number of hit points meaningless.

Casters have similar options to these in hold monster, command, finger of death or phantasmal killer.

Casting for DPS here is only a problem because it's not the correct move. So what it sounds like people are asking for is a way to narrow the gameplay and make it fit one certain style. Lets not make it so that casters can DPS carefree while the melee stands there and presses taunt every few seconds. Let's keep the options we have now.

DPS isn't always the answer. We don't need to change the game to fix that.