Why I think you should try 4e (renamed)

[Raven Crowking]

Somewhat OT, but the best fix for this that I saw was a suggestion of basically giving an "occupation bonus" of about 0.5-1 per year of intensive practice, up to a +10. Works for diplomats, craftsmen, etc., but unlikely to make much difference for adventurers. Doesn't have to be DM fiat, can be a new universally-applied rule.

The RCFG fix allows:

(1) Weapon damage to be increased by the use of weapon skill ranks,

(2) Rogues to increase sneak attack damage as an "assassin's blow", and

(3) A "getting the drop" mechanic that also allows an increase in damage.

In RCFG, the dagger is dangerous, but more dangerous is the hand that wields it!

To top this off, a heroic diplomat is RCFG is 6-8th level (max non-classed level is 10). Because RCFG uses static DCs for tasks, character growth is meaningful at this level. As a sedentary occupation, the diplomat would have 1d4 hp per level, or a range of 6 to 32, plus anything for Con.


RC

 

[jgbrowning]

The only way to solve the problem was to use DM fiat in a manner similar to what you're suggesting must be used for minions to survive to adulthood. In other words, "He can be assassinated in a single hit by being stabbed by a dagger, because it's important to the adventure and the setting and I say so."

It seems like every rule giveth and every rule taketh away sometimes.

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

I would pretty much completely disagree with this. It's a matter of DM and player taste. There are even published adventures - Thunderspire Labyrinth, for one - without really any minions at all.

I, personally, tend to add more, because I love movie ninjas. I don't see it breaking anything if you remove them entirely, though. You've mentioned that you think it breaks 4e combat, but I'm not really seeing how it could do that, after running the game for a year.

If you got the impression that I thought lacking minions breaks 4e combat that wasn't my intent. I don't think lacking minions "breaks" combat, I do think that it makes it harder to create balanced encounters if you don't use them than when you do. Harder, to me, isn't broken, just that it requires more effort.

joe b.

 

[Barastrondo]

But the reality is that you in fact do not become mighty enough to hew ogres in half with one shot. Special ogre pinatas have to be constructed to permit this expression of "might". Despite getting very powerful, an actual ogre still takes a bit of effort to defeat.

That's not "reality." That's your perception. Mine is that "ogre" does not mean "XX HP," and "actual" does not mean "non-minion." If something takes on a non-minion role, that makes them a credible threat. This is a decision not rated on genetics. The level 3 bandit chieftain is not an "actual" human being by compare to the 1-HP miller. He is more of a direct antagonist.

The idea of hit dice being a biological factor of species (kobolds are the 1/2-HD humanoid, goblins are the 1-1 HD humanoid, and the ecological niche that gnolls fill in the world is the 2 HD space between hobgoblins and bugbears) isn't one I subscribe to. It was useful back in the day, but even then you had different humanoids that line up in power level for the simple gaming purpose of letting players measure their increasing power level against them.

If you strip away all the context and just say "What is an ogre?", some people's definition will include 4+1 HD. But if that's not how things are defined as the player characters would see them, the PCs not being aware of the hit die mechanic, then the utility of having ogres be 4+1 HD in particular is fairly negligible. The practical effect is that PCs can measure themselves against ogres and know themselves to be outmatched, face a tough fight, or able to brutalize the poor oafs. But fixed hit dice, level and role is not the only way to achieve that practical effect. And I tend to favor solutions that lead to more elegant and engaging combats.

The ogres in this case trnsform into servants of El Nebuloso. That does not make the PC's more mythic.

"Jolly good"

If that's how you see it, sure. I prefer to make use of the minions rules, though, because it's more in keeping with how I see mythic heroes operating. The rules can now more accurately keep track of how we see the fight playing out in our heads.

But I come from a land where context is the coin of the realm. Absolutes tend to break down and start rusting the moment you start applying various contexts, so they are more idle carnival curiosities than state treasures.

 

[jgbrowning]

But the reality is that you in fact do not become mighty enough to hew ogres in half with one shot. Special ogre pinatas have to be constructed to permit this expression of "might". Despite getting very powerful, an actual ogre still takes a bit of effort to defeat.

Which is why many people don't like the minion concept. The narrative about why the Ogre falls in one shot isn't seen as sign of strength on the PC side, it's seen as sign of weakness on the enemy's. Different play styles have somewhat dramatically different takes on the concept.

joe b.

 

[Raven Crowking]

But I come from a land where context is the coin of the realm. Absolutes tend to break down and start rusting the moment you start applying various contexts, so they are more idle carnival curiosities than state treasures.

AFAICT, the crux of the argument you are responding to is that minions change the context of the "ogre" you are facing, so that your ability to hew it in half ceases to have any real meaning.

That's one of the problems with minion-type rules. Batman should be able to plow through common criminals, but if the common criminals are such that a feebleblow butterfly can do the same, does it really make Batman seem all that powerful?

Likewise, the Horta may kill minion Red Shirts left and right, but does this actually give Captain Kirk any real reason to imagine that it is something to be worried about, if he knows those Red Shirts are minions?

This is all about context.


RC

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Another question. If the mechanics/rules are the physics of the world, how did you deal with spawning monsters like the Wraith or the Pit fiend in pre 3e?

The Wraith Apocalypse is always thought-provoking. Perhaps non-magical counters exist (a line of salt across the doorway blocks them from entering a house), or they have some limits on how far they can travel from where they were spawned, or something else. But, yes, by RAW they will take over the world in a matter of days. Which pretty much demands divine intervention to hit the reset button, remove all incorporeal undead from the world, and leave a post-apocalyptic world for the PCs to explore some centuries later.

 

[Obryn]

If you got the impression that I thought lacking minions breaks 4e combat that wasn't my intent. I don't think lacking minions "breaks" combat, I do think that it makes it harder to create balanced encounters if you don't use them than when you do. Harder, to me, isn't broken, just that it requires more effort.

joe b.

Fair enough. Sorry for the misreading.

With that said, I think it's still pretty easy to make balanced encounters without them. I've found that more minions makes encounter balancing harder, actually, since throwing them all out at once makes for a very poor minion battle. I need to take waves into account for them to work effectively.

(Also, I either halve the XP value of minions - thus doubling their numbers - or else make them "tough minions" who take 2 hits and have a certain level of DR preventing easy popping, but who still die in 1 hit if you hit them hard enough.)

-O

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

AFAICT, there is no "minimum 1 point of damage" rule in 4E, nor is there a rule that requires a minion to take 1 point of damage to be defeated. A minion is defeated when it takes any hit point damage.

That's because there is no hit point damage below 1. There is just no damage. The stat block says its hit points are 1.

Yes. I used the same fix as all TSR-D&D has used: giving the GM explicit permission and encouragement to overide the rules when the rules don't make sense.

(Not that this occurs, of course, in RCFG. )

RC

So you haven't fixed it.

 

[jgbrowning]

The practical effect is that PCs can measure themselves against ogres and know themselves to be outmatched, face a tough fight, or able to brutalize the poor oafs. But fixed hit dice, level and role is not the only way to achieve that practical effect. And I tend to favor solutions that lead to more elegant and engaging combats.

But doesn't the minion mechanic throw a spanner in PC measurements of themselves vs. other creatures? I'd think the minion mechanic decreases the accuracy of group power judgments when facing opponents as opposed to increasing accuracy of that judgment. For example, we PCs brutalize minion ogres, face a tough fight against non-minion ogres, and are outmatch by uber-ogres, but which one are these ogres in front of us?

I'd assumed one of the reasons why minions were made was to increase the uncertainty of power judgments.

joe b.