Action-based rpg menu and party commands

In my game the player will be able to program the ai how to react with rules, e.g

1) if ( enemy is casting "instant death spell" ) use "crowd control spell"
2) if ( enemy faction is undead ) use "healing spell"
3) if ( player on low health) use "crowd control spell" and then use "healing spell"
4) if ( enemy on low health) "crowd control spell" and then dps.

They would be able to refer to spells as tags, e.g instead of silence to replace it with "crowd control" or "interrupt".
The idea will be each class to have 100-300 ai rules that defines how to move in general as well as when it specifically pvps against another class.
So a priest may save his "aoe fear" against a warrior since he knows it doesn't work on him.

Pros : allows to balance 1vs1 pvp against specific classes.

Questions :
1) Will it be fun if the main player was allowed to use this macro in their dps rotation ?
I remember In vanilla wow the feral druid class was almost unplayable. I had to use healing spells and kite in pvp, pressing 12312312 buttons, in order to beat an equally geared warrior, while the warrior only had to press 1 button. With this macro both classes could remove the "skill gap" and then classes will equal.

2) How about using ai macros to automate player farming / grinding e.g i leave my lv 1 warrior afk and when i returned in 1 month he is lv 60. Will it be a good design decision ?

You mean something like in Dragon Age?
The problem is that it's not sufficient. You couldn't set up extensive enough tactics for them to be able to act on their own.
Also it could still be quite extensive setting this up. Reducing number of skills could help (instead make them upgradeable like in Knights of the old republic),
but you should atleast include some predesigned intelligent tactics tree. You could still allow players to make up their own responses though.

Question 2:
No, no and no. Botting though is a big problem in mmorpgs. It unbalances the game economy. In an mmorpg I would do everything to make botting as hard as possible. Instead I would add a low persistent income (aslong as your subscription is running), so that those who have little play time can be well geared compared to their level, making levelling a bit faster for them (probably with increased xp gain which is normal).

In my game the player will be able to program the ai how to react with rules, e.g

1) if ( enemy is casting "instant death spell" ) use "crowd control spell"
2) if ( enemy faction is undead ) use "healing spell"
3) if ( player on low health) use "crowd control spell" and then use "healing spell"
4) if ( enemy on low health) "crowd control spell" and then dps.

They would be able to refer to spells as tags, e.g instead of silence to replace it with "crowd control" or "interrupt".
The idea will be each class to have 100-300 ai rules that defines how to move in general as well as when it specifically pvps against another class.
So a priest may save his "aoe fear" against a warrior since he knows it doesn't work on him.

Pros : allows to balance 1vs1 pvp against specific classes.

Questions :
1) Will it be fun if the main player was allowed to use this macro in their dps rotation ?
I remember In vanilla wow the feral druid class was almost unplayable. I had to use healing spells and kite in pvp, pressing 12312312 buttons, in order to beat an equally geared warrior, while the warrior only had to press 1 button. With this macro both classes could remove the "skill gap" and then classes will equal.

2) How about using ai macros to automate player farming / grinding e.g i leave my lv 1 warrior afk and when i returned in 1 month he is lv 60. Will it be a good design decision ?

No AI's otherwise there is no point to this type of design.
The point is to control what all characters do in battle, directly.

Between yours and Immorals comments- I have forgotten about actual skills you party does.
That was an oversite- I didnt even notice.

I also thought from this point of view of the party battling one strong enemy.
Speaking of macro- no the enemy, when i think of design- enemies are very intelligent, repetitive, but intelligent.

You mean something like in Dragon Age?
The problem is that it's not sufficient. You couldn't set up extensive enough tactics for them to be able to act on their own.
Also it could still be quite extensive setting this up. Reducing number of skills could help (instead make them upgradeable like in Knights of the old republic),
but you should atleast include some predesigned intelligent tactics tree. You could still allow players to make up their own responses though.

Question 2:
No, no and no. Botting though is a big problem in mmorpgs. It unbalances the game economy. In an mmorpg I would do everything to make botting as hard as possible. Instead I would add a low persistent income (aslong as your subscription is running), so that those who have little play time can be well geared compared to their level, making levelling a bit faster for them (probably with increased xp gain which is normal).

Yikes, when I think of these ideas
Their scope is a typical jprg. If the posters are thinking of an MMORPG- then no, its too complicated to implement.

I didnt intend for them to make their own combos per se
The tactics tree is included in the gameplay- if not all of it.
As for reducing skill- the character has set positions in battle and based on the tactics, do it in their own way.
Hope this makes sense.

I'm not against these AI-themed systems, but I think they'd work better in a sci-fi environment than in a traditional medieval RPG.
The reason for that is that you can't possibly have that much micro control over them.
It is philosophical enough, but, the player either plays a character, or an entity governing them.
If the player plays the character, movements are directly tied to input.
If the player plays an entity, he can give 'general commands' but can't quite go deep down in scope and determine everything.
It would work in a turn-based rpg because the player plays a character, then another, but only one at the time, and this translated badly into real-time.

Like I said, in SCI-fi, one could argue that he commands three or four robots through AI he has just written. Likewise, once the AI is written, there is no 'controlling' what unravels.
I had approached the idea a few years back, but felt like it gave ground to a lot of "menu-based gameplay" but little once the battle actually started.
The result is that the menus were a lot of fun, while the battles where a lot of 'watching' and I feel like RPGs have enough 'watching' as it is (or button-mashing to skip text).
The general idea, while interesting mechanic-wise, just doesn't translate all that well into 'fun' or 'gameplay'