Minions are alien visitors from another kind of game

[Fallen Seraph]

*Shrugs shoulders* I guess myself and my players play a different style of D&D. We play to be characters in a story, yes the players can dictate to the characters things that influence and change the story but it is still a story.

That doesn't mean though it is railroaded. The players explore, do lots of side-quests, etc. But that is simply part of the story as well, so Minions are quite effective as narrative/plot devices in the main storyline and side-quests.

They are especially nice when you do Episodic-Gaming like we do, where say... 2-3 Sessions is a Episode, so I as a DM want a moment where the players take on mobs of monsters, then I use Minions in that part of the Episode. As such each Episode has a rising, climax and closing action and Minions can play a roll in any of them.

 

[Aria Silverhands]

Me neither. The idea of "Enemies fall when it feels right" is way too painfully narrative for me. I don't feel like I'm playing a game anymore, I feel like I'm just here to amuse the DM until he gets bored.

Unless the DM specifically tells you they're doing this with solo/epic encounters, you'd never know. If you're meta-gaming because the dm is using stock encounters/monsters out of the book, it's your own damn fault for cheating in the first place.

Minions don't really do that for me as badly, because I can accept "one hit would've killed them anyway." They *almost* do that by not dying on a miss, but with the "no one dies on a miss" house rule, it feels more "fair."

If the dm described the minion as bruised, wounded, bleeding, burned, battered, staggered, etc would that help?

 

[AllisterH]

Er, of course the DM lets you win....It's ridiculously easy for the DMs to beat the players by the rules as they were. Simply send a higher level monster.

I like both the minion and the Solo concept as they both facilitate what I think is D&D's strength. To make an enjoyable experience for the players. I would say a larger majority of D&D players are interested in modelling things they see on screen and in books and both the Solo and Minion allow the DM to do this.

Without the minion concept, we have the pre-4E situation where even though both Conan and LotR have great "heroes vs the minion scenes", D&D could never model it. I always considered that a fallure of the D&D rules in that it couldn't even depict a common trope found in its varied source material.

Similarly, the concept of the Solo (which admittedly fewer people gripe about) is a textbook example of how you CAN'T treat the world the same as the game as they don't mesh well at all.

 

[Pale Jackal]

Well from a in-game perspective the Minion is the unlucky one that slipped on mud and was impaled by the PC, while the Monster is the one that manages to block a blow with their shield, or roll in time to only get cut along the arm.

From out-of-game, the Players will only know which is a Minion when they go down and if you as a DM has created a fairly good narrative to the combat, it doesn't break immersion.

Alternately, some orcs are easier to kill than others. I don't see how that breaks suspension of disbelief for anyone, really.

Would you describe a 1 HP fighter in 1st edition as dying from a dagger prick? You could, but that would be really, really dumb, IMO. No, the 1 HP fighter got his throat slit, or was stabbed in the heart. Take your pick of dagger induced mortal wounds.

Thus, a 1 HP minion does not die from a dagger prick. He's simply easier to mortally wound than his more combat adept fellows. I'm so glad 4E has embraced abstract HP... no, abstract HP isn't flawless, but it's better than "10 HP is a mortal wound. Your 10th level fighter can take approximately 7-10 mortal wounds."

 

[reanjr]

I think giving them 1 HP is the same as giving as 1-4 HP, but without the book keeping. There were always creatures in 3e that had so few HP, it wasn't worth keeping track of. Many a time, the players' damage dealers couldn't even hit the guys without killing them due to bonuses. Even when it was possible, it was very unlikely.

The 1 HP thing is a different on paper but I think it will amount to business as usual in play. Only without book keeping.

 

[Korgoth]

Haha, that's ridiculous. You would never know. Unless you cheat and peek at the DM's notes or the DM is an idiot and tells you.

If I get cheated and don't know it, I still got cheated. There's this whole concept called "integrity" that comes into play.

And suppose I just ask the DM point blank: "Hey DM, were we just your dancing monkeys back there or did we beat that Dire Stoat fair-and-square?" It's a legitimate question. So, supposing that the DM did just monkey-dance us, what will the DM answer? He will either lie (is it worth risking Hell for a stupid game?), tell the truth (then I have my tirade) or evade (which is merely the spineless version of telling the truth, same result).

 

[pemerton]

We are all accustomed to the rules being descriptive of the world

Who's this "we"?

 

[hong]

If I get cheated and don't know it, I still got cheated. There's this whole concept called "integrity" that comes into play.

And suppose I just ask the DM point blank: "Hey DM, were we just your dancing monkeys back there or did we beat that Dire Stoat fair-and-square?" It's a legitimate question. So, supposing that the DM did just monkey-dance us, what will the DM answer? He will either lie (is it worth risking Hell for a stupid game?), tell the truth (then I have my tirade) or evade (which is merely the spineless version of telling the truth, same result).

If it ever gets to the point where you are asking the DM did he fudge, then the DM's fudging has failed.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Unless the DM specifically tells you they're doing this with solo/epic encounters, you'd never know. If you're meta-gaming because the dm is using stock encounters/monsters out of the book, it's your own damn fault for cheating in the first place.

For me and the DMs I play under, keeping secrets isn't a high priority, because it's not a lot of fun for us. I mean, I suppose a DM could keep it from me and giggle about it behind everyone's back, but, for the most part, the DMs I've had have been more keen on saying stuff like "Don't bother telling me the damage on these guys."

We're not very adversarial, and we're not very invested in secrets that aren't directly relevant to the game.

If the dm described the minion as bruised, wounded, bleeding, burned, battered, staggered, etc would that help?

Why would it?

It doesn't annoy me that the DM doesn't waste his breath describing what happened.

It bothers me that nothing actually happened.

Listening to the DM go on for 30 seconds about how "he goes 'ouch'" doesn't mean I've actually accomplished anything.

And if I've blown my daily or my per-encounter on this guy? Only to have to do absolutely nothing?

Yeah, I'm not really satisfied by DM verbosity.

 

[The Dude]

They don't? After killing 400 minions over 15 levels of advancment they haven't noticed that some orcs can be killed with a well throw pat of butter and others can nap under a pile driver without risk?

In all likelihood, the first time PCs encounter that monster, it was not a minion. The PCs probably will not face the minion-version until they advance high enough that one-hit-kills seem reasonable.

Even if the PCs do meet minion-versions of that monster early on, the PCs will probably never know that the monster had only 1 HP unless they chronically roll crap damage (possible) or the DM doesn't bother to let them roll and announce damage before declaring the monster dead (which foolishly disrupts player immersion). The player could make a good guess based on their knowledge of minion rules, but it is still only a guess without the above.

If they are intended to be beings that actually exist in the same physical reality as the PCs then how can the PCs fail to notice that 4 out of 5 monsters are made out of angry soap bubbles and every 5th monster has actual meat on his bones?

This, by the way, is NOT a simulation issue. It's an immersion issue.

I don't think the minions are intended to exist independently of the PCs. A monster is appropriate for normal use when the PCs are at one level, but the minion "template" (I don't know if that is the terminology that 4e is using) is better when the PCs reach a higher level. Minions don't "exist" until the DM feels that minions of that level need to exist for the PCs.

For example, a party of first-level PCs could face a group of 6th level minions. With only one hit point and the slower rate of increase in AC/Defs, the party could win. However, the NPC's AC/Defs-BAB-DmgOutput relative to the PCs would create a virtual save-or-die situation- it would be a race to see who struck who first. Despite the 1 HP rule, a party of 6th level minions is NOT an appropriate challenge for a 1st level party. 6th level minions are better for parties of 6th level or higher (depending on how tough the monster is supposed to be without the template- some monsters normally have more HP than others); while the PCs are lower in level, they should never face the minion-version of that monster (unless the DM thinks of a reason why it would be ok). The monsters do not have the minion template until the PCs reach a level high enough that a horde of easily-killed monsters of that type is a good idea. You might say that the minion template is PC dependent, not world dependent.

Don't get me wrong; I do worry about this set of rules. I don't think anything in-game is going to tell the PCs "hey, these are minions; they only have 1 HP" and break the immersion. However, my players' awareness of the minion rule may cause a break in immersion and that does worry me. Hopefully, it won't be a problem. If it ends up a problem, I will come up with a houserule that handles the problem.