The connection of this point to the minions is that I might use the minions once or twice if play seems to have bogged down simply due to disorganisation/incompetence on the part of those at the table - this is the Raymond Chandler approach to reviving a flagging narrative - but wouldn't use them to try to push the players into caring about something that they have clearly signalled a lack of interest in.
But if the players clearly have an interest, but are dragging their feat (being overly cautious, taking other missions along the way, etc.), it makes sense to use this type of device for your style of play, correct?
Yes - and your other descriptions of my approach are all accurate too.
I'm glad I didn't mischaracterize your play style.
A final comment on the minions, resource sucking, and various techniques for dealing with the 15-minute day - different action resolution systems can be affected differently by a depletion in resources.
[SNIP]
4e has a different dynamic.
[SNIP]
A full-resource party against weak opponents is generally tedious in 4e (of course there can always be exceptions) because the combat will still take a while to resolve (due to the damage to hit point ratios), and resources are unlikely to be soaked - encounter powers will come back, and with surgeless healing, or encounter-power-based buffs on surged healing, no signficant damage soaking will take place.
[SNIP]
Anyway, the point of that long recounting of encounter structures in different systems is just to illustrate how system can shape the way a minion encounter can be expected to play out, and whether it will be dramatic or tedious (and so worth doing, all things considered), and can also shape the effect that resource attrition has on the drama of subsequent encounters.
I actually chose the word "minion" very carefully: I was using 4e terminology. If you threw literal minions (1 HP) at the party in significant numbers, would that not take up a few of their surges, even though the combat would be settled relatively quickly (since they are defeated in one hit)?
It's not a defence, or a criticism, of either RM or 4e - just continuing to make the point that playstyle, system, use of time in the game, etc, are all intricately related - so there is no "one size fits all", system and playstyle independent "fix" for the 15 MAD.
Of course there's no "one size fits all fix" for the 15MWD, but I do believe that "time pressure" or "timelines" do not necessarily clash with the style you've been espousing. That was my point. I wasn't saying it would always work, or that it should always be employed, I was just replying to your statement:
pemerton said:
This whole exchange started because I said that timelines aren't a good solution to the 15-min day for all scenarios and all playstyles. And I gave my own playstyle - "no failure offscreen" - as an example.
Given this thread (and the above quote), and my reply, I don't feel as if I was pushing for one solution to your problem. I was commenting specifically on "timelines" not being a suitable solution some of the time to the problem. Even "static" places can be altered with a little heavy-handedness. Abandoned enchanted ruins? Maybe guardians activate in waves. Maybe the place builds up more of a resistance to you the longer you're there. There's a lot of maybes you can use.
At any rate, that's all I was commenting on. I think that timelines and the implied time pressure will work a lot of the time, even with a "no failures off-screen" style of play. Many players will start acting more proactively if they think there's a reason they shouldn't, including past experience from waiting around a bit too much. As always, play what you like
