General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Easy. Each type of creature has the same counter associated with it.
That's in the rules, is it?
As a DM who uses minis, the first thing I thought when I was reading the minion rules is "I can no longer use the same mini to represent the various types of monsters, because it would be too obvious which ones are the minions." You have to mix it up a bit.
That's not a rules problem, that's a DMing problem.
__________________ Iain Fyffe
Original member of the Rouseketeers!
I have played 4E. And just like all other editions of D&D, it is awesome!
no one quotes me in sigs - Crothian
For some reason, this doesn't fill me with rage. I must be interwebbing wrong. - Cadfan
That's not a rules problem, that's a DMing problem.
I've noticed, and I might be completely wrong, that the majority of discussions in which complaints surface about minions, that the overarching problem seems to boil down to one of DM presentation and execution more than one of mechanics.
As above, there is little satisfaction in completing a task that had little or no chance of failure. I'm much happier knowing that I did 5 damage more than I needed, than knowing it doesn't matter what I roll.
Yes, from a tactical stand point it was good to kill the minion. But it doesn't feel like an achievement, because the challenge of doing so was drastically reduced.
I really don't understand. Let me try.
In order for something to feel challenging, you need to have to make a damage roll that might fail. The challenge/tactical situation of the encounter doesn't matter; it's only the individual attack + damage roll that matters.
__________________ "If people bring so much courage to this world the world has to kill them to break them, so of course it kills them. The world breaks every one and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these you can be sure it will kill you too but there will be no special hurry."
-- Ernest Hemingway, "A Farewell to Arms" Burning Empires:Boldaq Keep on the Shadowfell
As above, there is little satisfaction in completing a task that had little or no chance of failure. I'm much happier knowing that I did 5 damage more than I needed, than knowing it doesn't matter what I roll.
I am not sure I should still answer to this, since you apparently posted in the wrong thread, but what the heck:
I think you are making a leap of thought here I can't entirely follow - just because it doesn't matter how much damage you do doesn't mean the task is meaningless or has no chance of failure. You might be right for the "mini-task" of dealing enough damage, but you're not right for the bigger tasks "taking down a minion" or the next bigger task "surviving the encounter".
If you brought down a Dragon to 1 hit points, that doesn't mean that you have no chance of failure. You haven't succeeded until the Dragon is dead and can no longer endanger you (an important qualifier - some monsters do crazy stuff when dying ).
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
In order for something to feel challenging, you need to have to make a damage roll that might fail. The challenge/tactical situation of the encounter doesn't matter; it's only the individual attack + damage roll that matters.
Also, apparently the fact that the attack roll might miss is ignored as well. Even though with 4E minion rules, you have have a creature with a high AC that you can drop in one hit. In previous editions, if a monster was weak enough to drop in one hit, it generally had a low AC as well. And a low attack roll.
The minion rules allow one-hit monsters that are otherwise credible threats.
__________________ Iain Fyffe
Original member of the Rouseketeers!
I have played 4E. And just like all other editions of D&D, it is awesome!
no one quotes me in sigs - Crothian
For some reason, this doesn't fill me with rage. I must be interwebbing wrong. - Cadfan
However, 4e gave us something REALLY cool- the disease condition track. I modified the disease condition track to take into account long-term injuries and magical curses, and it could be modified for a number of other things I probably haven't considered yet. Injuries require an Endurance check to improve (or can worsen with a low check), and curses I handle with a Wisdom or Charisma check (the 1/2 level + mod roll) which can also improve or worsen. Here is an example:
When a character goes to 0 hp or below, they take an "attack" to Fortitude equal to the damage caused by the blow that sent them down. If the attack misses, they were assumed to have just been KO'd or have various contusions or flesh wounds. If the attack "hits" they suffer a long-term wound, and we roll randomly on a table for the wound and location. Let's say the character suffered a broken arm.
Broken Arm
Endurance: Improve DC 18, Maintain DC 12, Worsen DC 11 or less
Check 1/x per 3 days
Healed <- Initial effect: -4 to any activities with the arm (including attacks or skill checks) character max of 75% of hp <-> Infection/bleeding: as above, plus max hp are 50% of normal, -2 healing surges until improve, DC to improve or maintain +2 -> Gangrene: amputation necessary
So far, this is working really well for us. We've also added several healing rituals that help set bones, mend tissues, etc, and if a magical healing Power is used, it adds a bonus to the roll equal to its level and allows an immediate check (max of once per day). I'll admit, I'm more of a simulationist DM, and even then I love 4e- I can make it work for us with far fewer mods than I could 3.x.[/quote]
By any chance are these rules typed up? Are they available for public consumption?
I would really love to see them as this sounds very much like something I would like to add to my Campaign - Thanks!
Seriously. Why bother having exciting weapons when a pointy stick will do the same job? In previous editions this came up. You wore a creature down, or it was way below your level. You couldn't fail to kill it if you scored the hit. But that was few and far between. This is pretty frequent.
Higher to-hit bonuses? If you are unable to hit them, you won't be able to kill them. And the weapon proficiency and enchantment boni do make a difference...
__________________
- a 4E setting for urban adventures! Join the ENWorld Urbis Group!
In order for something to feel challenging, you need to have to make a damage roll that might fail. The challenge/tactical situation of the encounter doesn't matter; it's only the individual attack + damage roll that matters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustrum_Ridcully
I think you are making a leap of thought here I can't entirely follow - just because it doesn't matter how much damage you do doesn't mean the task is meaningless or has no chance of failure. You might be right for the "mini-task" of dealing enough damage, but you're not right for the bigger tasks "taking down a minion" or the next bigger task "surviving the encounter".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fifth Element
Also, apparently the fact that the attack roll might miss is ignored as well. Even though with 4E minion rules, you have have a creature with a high AC that you can drop in one hit. In previous editions, if a monster was weak enough to drop in one hit, it generally had a low AC as well. And a low attack roll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jürgen Hubert
Higher to-hit bonuses? If you are unable to hit them, you won't be able to kill them. And the weapon proficiency and enchantment boni do make a difference...
All of the above are valid points that I agree with. My issue is with the perceived achievement of killing a minion. AC and tactical advantage aside, killing a monster with lots of hit points has a great deal more kudos than killing a monster with one hit point. I do not find killing minions satisfying.
But, as it has been pointed out to me, this is not the whining thread, so in an attempt to return to the actual topic, here's what I like about 4E.
Ability scores are handled by standard array or points buy as the default methods.
Fixed starting money – not random like 3E
Saves became defences like AC – rolling remains on the attacker’s side, rather than the defender’s side.
Similar skills have been combined (although I feel they may have gone too far with this)
Basic spells (cantrips/orisons) are not limited use per day.
Natural armour is no longer a consideration for character sheets
Passive senses are written straight into the rules
Flat footed and touch AC are gone.
Weapons are grouped by type (unfortunately proficiency is not)
Monsters each have more than one example
Weapon size has returned to the 3.0 system.
Weight/carry system is simpler particularly in terms of how it affects movement.
The disease system
The concept behind skill challenges
Fewer classes know how to wear plate mail straight off
There are currently no splat books to consider
Paladins are not restricted to lawful good.
Critical/fumbled skill checks are +/- 5 instead of +/- 10.
Low level wizards do not run out of spells too quickly.
All of the above are valid points that I agree with. My issue is with the perceived achievement of killing a minion. AC and tactical advantage aside, killing a monster with lots of hit points has a great deal more kudos than killing a monster with one hit point. I do not find killing minions satisfying.
The simple solution is not to use them. They are a tool for the DM and you should ask yours not to include them or up their HPs to something like 3*level.
You can replace every four minions with a non-minion monster of the same level.
__________________ Pablo El Vagabundo
"Mercy!? You want MERCY? I'M CHAOTIC NEUTRAL!!!"
The simple solution is not to use them. They are a tool for the DM and you should ask yours not to include them or up their HPs to something like 3*level.
You can replace every four minions with a non-minion monster of the same level.
Seriously. I have no idea why minions are such a supposed sticking point for so many people when they're entirely optional.
Seriously. I have no idea why minions are such a supposed sticking point for so many people when they're entirely optional.
Wizards are entirely optional. Fighters are entirely optional. Heck, even monsters are optional. That doesn't mean they're not going to get used. Pre-written modules assume you're using minions in the same way that they assume you're using wizards and fighters.
Wizards are entirely optional. Fighters are entirely optional. Heck, even monsters are optional. That doesn't mean they're not going to get used. Pre-written modules assume you're using minions in the same way that they assume you're using wizards and fighters.
I think you are missing the point the previous poster was trying to make.
If minions bother your group so much that the DM or players can't work with them then there is a "conversion path" and it is quite simple, replace every 4 minions for one regular creature.
A DM should know his group, and if minions are causing such a fuss for his group he should adjust, even if he is reading from a pre-written module.
Replacing wizards & fighters from a pre-written adventure might not be so simple, but replacing minions is a no-brainer.
Minions are a "tool" for the DM to use for a specific effect, to increase the number of opponents in a combat to make it more exciting. If he can't use them in that manner or they are not producing that effect for his specific group then he should refrain from using them. But that decision is left up to each individual DM.
1. Easier Prep Time: DnD 4E is easy to run and prep for. So much is streamlined and handwaved that it makes it an easy game to run. It is also easier to make characters and get the game underway. It is easy to make decisions on characters, though I miss the customization of 3E.
I don't know if this is a thread jack But I've run 4e twice, two Living Forgotten Realms mods. So I can't comment on 4e 'home games'. That 4e is easy to run and Prep for is is most common 4e benefit mentioned for DMs that I've seen. but after skimming through the 4e DMG, I don't agree. I think skill challenges are "artificial" and at times you need a specific reason to create one. I mean if you're running a wilderness encounter, what's a wizard to do except make a nature check?
Also it wasn't clear about the rules for creating minions. It seems that 4e takes as long as or longer than 3e to prep games for.
Mike
__________________ "I am a Ranger. We walk in the dark places no others will enter. We stand on the bridge and no one may pass. We live for The One. We die for The One." Marcus, Babylon 5
Also it wasn't clear about the rules for creating minions. It seems that 4e takes as long as or longer than 3e to prep games for.
Mike
It really, really, really doesn't. Then the monster builder came out this month and even that time was cut. Being able to create 20 new monsters in under an hour is soooo good.
I don't know if this is a thread jack But I've run 4e twice, two Living Forgotten Realms mods. So I can't comment on 4e 'home games'. That 4e is easy to run and Prep for is is most common 4e benefit mentioned for DMs that I've seen. but after skimming through the 4e DMG, I don't agree. I think skill challenges are "artificial" and at times you need a specific reason to create one. I mean if you're running a wilderness encounter, what's a wizard to do except make a nature check?
Also it wasn't clear about the rules for creating minions. It seems that 4e takes as long as or longer than 3e to prep games for.
Mike
I spend roughly the same amount of time prepping for my games in 4e as I did in 3e.
The difference is I'm no longer spending 90-100% of that time just figuring out the stats. Now I spend a lot of time working on the smaller details, that make the encounter more fun, and the flavor of the whole thing.
It also doesn't hurt as much to see an encounter not get used.
No problem. I've had those days too.
).
But I've run 4e twice, two Living Forgotten Realms mods. So I can't comment on 4e 'home games'. That 4e is easy to run and Prep for is is most common 4e benefit mentioned for DMs that I've seen. but after skimming through the 4e DMG, I don't agree. I think skill challenges are "artificial" and at times you need a specific reason to create one. I mean if you're running a wilderness encounter, what's a wizard to do except make a nature check? 
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
