GM Prep Time - Cognitive Dissonance in Encounter Design?

[Gimby]

It was never my intention to imply that anything ceased to exist when not in proximity to something else.
Impact on the world through storytelling works wonderfully in a storytelling style campaign. If the campaign is not being played in that style then the minion concept is meaningless. Thus if it is your assertion that certain interactions are best handled through the medium of the story then a story based campaign is the assumed mode of play based on rules that support this.

It is one approach, not all, to running a campaign.

There are some other ways of looking at it that may help this disconnect.

From designer description and examination of their presentation in the monster manuals (Ogres are a good example of this) minions seem to be primarily an administrative abstraction. Their purpose (much like the mob monster rules from 3.5) is to allow a large number of creatures in a fight while not massively increasing the administrative burden on the DM.

Consider then that the minions are simply being represented at a lower time resolution than other creatures - to a high level character a low level creature may take two hits to kill at 95% to hit and it may have a 10% to hit him to do an average of 15 points of damage. We could alternatively represent this creature as a higher level minion which is hit 50% of the time and hits 50% of the time for 3 points of damage. On average, it will take our character 2 attacks to kill the monster either way and they will take on average 3 points of damage doing so. Do you get some odd edge cases? Sure, but you always will do as assuming any system is the physics of the game world.

Is it a pretty big abstraction? Sure. IMO though, its of the same order of abstraction as turn based combat or even the existance of hit points.

 

[Imaro]

It was never my intention to imply that anything ceased to exist when not in proximity to something else.
Impact on the world through storytelling works wonderfully in a storytelling style campaign. If the campaign is not being played in that style then the minion concept is meaningless. Thus if it is your assertion that certain interactions are best handled through the medium of the story then a story based campaign is the assumed mode of play based on rules that support this.

It is one approach, not all, to running a campaign.

Yes, I myself am interested in hearing about how people use minions in sandbox type games... if at all.

 

[LostSoul]

Yes, I myself am interested in hearing about how people use minions in sandbox type games... if at all.

Non-combatants.

 

[BryonD]

it isn't necessary that a monster's mechanics reflect its impact on the world more accurately than its impact on the party, because the monster's impact on the world is much better handled through storytelling rather than mechanical interaction. Save the mechanical interaction for when the players get involved with the monster.

Yet again 4E is defended by saying that it is good at things that apply to any system, rather than saying it is better at something on its own merits.

I agree with you that my ability to storytell has nothing to do with one system over another. My ability to storytell is not improved or decreased by switching to Pathfinder, GURPS, WOD, whatever.

So, the choice for which game system to actually use comes down to the impact the mechanics actually have on the game.

As you point out, 4E does not see a need to try to have a self consistent mechanic for npcs interaction with the world at large.

Thus, for someone who wants the actual game mechanics to live up to the expectations of the storytelling, there are other systems which (literally) bring more to the table.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Yes, I myself am interested in hearing about how people use minions in sandbox type games... if at all.

I see most of humanity as being minions, in much they same way they've been 0-level humans or 1st level commoners in previous editions. This interpretation isn't required by the rules, one could equally regard the mass of humanity as levelled 'monsters', in which case 1st level PCs would be a lot weaker, relatively speaking. Unlike 3e, the rules of 4e don't contain a description of society in rules terms. They don't provide the level and class breakdown of NPCs to be found in each settlement.

Another use for minions I've seen is as wandering monsters, as one normally wants those encounters to be quick.

 

[Scribble]

Yes, I myself am interested in hearing about how people use minions in sandbox type games... if at all.

I don't really think it's an issue of sandbox vrs non sandbox, as they're just a different type of challenge found in the game, and as such can be used like any other component of the game.

For me a monster doesn't ever "become" a minion, some are minions some aren't. Some things in the world are also non combatants. They don't have combat stats, because if they try to fight, they'll just die.

I agree with you that my ability to storytell has nothing to do with one system over another. My ability to storytell is not improved or decreased by switching to Pathfinder, GURPS, WOD, whatever.

So, the choice for which game system to actually use comes down to the impact the mechanics actually have on the game.

As you point out, 4E does not see a need to try to have a self consistent mechanic for npcs interaction with the world at large.

And this is for the most part why I like it. Since, as you say my ability to story-tell doesn't rely on the rules- I choose a game because I feel the the rules are fun, and work well.

4e for me is a set of rules that work well, feel consistent (rules wise) are fun in their own right, while at the same time for the most part get out of the way as quickly as possible.

 

[Imaro]

Non-combatants.

What about stuff like Ogre minions?

 

[billd91]

I don't use 4e-style minions. Instead, if I want some lackeys backing up a BBEG but I don't want them particularly durable (just a way to suck up some character actions so they're not all targeting Mr BBEG), I just give them minimum hit points per die, knock down their Str and Con 2-4 points, and call it done. They may take 1 hit to kill, maybe a few depending on which PC squares off against them. But one thing's for certain, they're not standing up to the PCs like a normal example of the monster.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Neochameleon, I'm cutting swaths of your response, because I think there's only really one or two points of discussion. Hope that doesn't mischaracterize your position at all.

You can totally find those things in stat blocks.

Mea culpa. You can't find them in D&D stat blocks in any edition (with the arguable exception of alignment). Or, for that matter, GURPS ones. You can in e.g. Spirit of the Century (to name one example I am familliar with.

So, all of this applies for combat. Stats are fun (watching them go up as you level up is fun!). Stats don't depend on player skill (it doesn't matter if you know how to properly penetrate chainmail -- roll a die). Stats are fair and impartial (the DM, and other players, can't even subconsciously hose you over simply by being human and having bias).

Here you're off my argument. Which is that (under D&D rules - which I did not specify earlier, but are the context I was talking about), you don't need such things in monster statblocks. I'm not proposing the abolition of Diplomacy from the PC statblocks. Simply that with the PCs being the protagonists, any opposed rolls can be off just one die roll - and that that can depend on what the PCs are trying to do, modified by the monster at flat DC. This does not require them to be in the monster statblock.

Yes, I myself am interested in hearing about how people use minions in sandbox type games... if at all.

Three ways: straight, lampshaded, and mechanical.

Mechanical minions are the easiest - things like summoned skeletons or summoned wisps. Scary, but if hit they e.g. collapse into a pile of bones or the summons is broken. In short they do exactly what they say on the tin.

Lampshaded minions are there but scared or there for the hell of it and don;t realise they could get hurt. The scorching burst doesn't kill them - they simply run for cover. (Think looters or junior acolytes.)

Straight minions simply are. Either non-combatants or too weak to threaten the party.

Yet again 4E is defended by saying that it is good at things that apply to any system, rather than saying it is better at something on its own merits.

Yet it is good at what it does. It's the best RPG tactical (as opposed to fluff) action movie system I've ever seen. Explosive, kinetic, and fluffy action scenes married to a rules-light system the rest of the time.

Thus, for someone who wants the actual game mechanics to live up to the expectations of the storytelling, there are other systems which (literally) bring more to the table.

Not in my experience in pulp/action movie style combat with tactical resolution. That's where 4e wins.

What I'm not sure is what any previous edition of D&D is the best at except being D&D. 4e is the first version that has, to me, anything to recommend it for other settings other than an installed user base.

 

[Garthanos]

What about stuff like Ogre minions?

Minions lack heroic/villainous luck most of the time they are just the joe blows of the universe they get hurt they stop fighting they run away etc they dont skip nimbly out of the way or have some environmental feature coincidentally intervene they dont get the tough guy Im not really hurt as bad as it looks effect... etc Avandra supports heros and thinks they need villains.

The above works well enough for most minions...

Most attack forms like 3 feet of sharp steel or even a foot and a half are enough they really can kill in one blow... even most tough enemies... but

I think something like an Ogre minion could be seen as having actively bad luck the bad luck means something happens that works around monstrous toughness you expect out of well a monstrous being... that sword blow is effectively a critical hit the blade enters the eye ball and into the brain... etc.

A minion allows you to take any attack form and describe critical hit effectiveness... a wizards cold attack freezes solid etc ... and yeah if you want to not kill with it you thaw them ;p