Heroic Fray and Minions in D&D

[Manbearcat]

AD&D 2e's Heroic Fray rules outlined in Combat and Tactics are the first specific rules I can recall that attempt to engender that Moria, Alamo, Thermopylae experience of the horde pressing in on implacable heroes as they make a desperate last stand against insurmountable (for lesser heroes at least) numbers. Its the first D&D incarnation of Mooks and Minions that I'm personally aware of.

Warriors facing considerably less skillful adversaries gained bonus attacks. The mechanics were thus:

1) The enemies had to outnumber the PCs.

2) The enemies either had to be 1-1 HD or less or they had to be 10 levels less than the heroes. Effectively, foes that were pretty well assured to go down in 1 hit.

3) If conditions 1 and 2 were met, the warriors would double their main hand rate of attack.

4) In addition to 3 above, they would also gain 1 extra attack against any enemy they threaten when they begin resolving their attacks. This extra attack could only be used to perform a shield punch, a shield-rush, unarmed punch or kick, or a grab maneuver.


So a couple questions then:

- Anyone aware of any specific Mook/Minion rules (as the above) that predate AD&D 2e Combat & Tactic's Heroic Fray rules? UA didn't do it and I'm unaware of any Dragon Articles that may have attempted it.

- They were a great deal of fun and rather simply allowed for the genre conceit of a few lone heroes holding the gap against the horde. If you were aware of them and used them, did you enjoy them? If you enjoyed them then but currently dislike MInion/Mook rules, what changed?

- Anyone remember any localized anecdotes (their groups or groups they knew) of these rules drawing the kind of ire that 4e Minion rules drew? Anyone remember any angst on Usenet Groups or at Cons?

 

[MerricB]

The early versions of D&D allowed fighters to attack a number of times equal to their level against opponents with less than one Hit Die (alternatively with one hit die or fewer). It is certainly a rule in AD&D, and derives from how Chainmail handled combat.

Chainmail was a "one hit, one kill" system, where a die was rolled for every (standard) combatant and every hit would kill an opponent. On the mass battlefield, heroes counted as four figures - they attacked four times, but required four simultaneous hits to kill. Superheroes attacked 8 times, requiring 8 simultaneous hits to kill. Hero and Superhero became the 4th and 8th level Fighter, respectively, in D&D.

AD&D states that Fighters, Paladins and Rangers may attack once per each of their levels against 0-level humans or opponents with less than 1 hit die (1d8).

Cheers!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

AD&D states that Fighters, Paladins and Rangers may attack once per each of their levels against 0-level humans or opponents with less than 1 hit die (1d8).

Cheers!

I believe this was an optional rule in 2E, but I may be mistaken, and in the DMG, and thus frequently overlooked. It was a really GOOD rule, though, in that it made Warriors vastly more effectively against larger numbers of weak monsters, preventing them from being solely a job for the Mage.

I was surprised that 3E didn't take it on in any form, frankly, but then I would say 3.XE had the worst multi-attack rules of any edition by a huge margin, so I guess I shouldn't have been surprised, in retrospect.

As noted by the OP 4E replaced this with minions, which essentially serve the same role, but are a bit more flexible. Unfortunately, I think that for a lot of groups, they weren't a great fit with D&D's perceived style.

C&T's rules on the subject are an interesting take. They don't make the Warriors as effective vs. mobs of really weak enemies, but they make them significantly more effective vs. low-level but not 1 HD enemies once the Warriors are above level 11 - I note that we'd often see groups of 3-5 HD enemies in the teens in 2E, and using these rules, you'd get double attacks against those, which would be great.

Sad to see (imho, of course) that 5E hasn't taken on any rules like these, but I guess they'd be something fairly easy to house-rule in, if one was inclined to.

 

[MerricB]

I was surprised that 3E didn't take it on in any form, frankly, but then I would say 3.XE had the worst multi-attack rules of any edition by a huge margin, so I guess I shouldn't have been surprised, in retrospect.

Actually, 3E did - but, like many things that 3E did, it turned the abilities into feats. Cleave and Great Cleave are the feats in question.

Cheers!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Actually, 3E did - but, like many things that 3E did, it turned the abilities into feats. Cleave and Great Cleave are the feats in question.

Cheers!

Good point, well made! I didn't think of that. Bloody Feats though...

 

[Rod Staffwand]

Yeah, we used the 1 attack per round rules vs. 1HD or less opponents in 1e and 2e both. It was a clean, efficient rule and a lot of fun. I remember a friend's 7th level paladin on his warhorse surrounded by goblinoids and laying waste to them in epic fashion.

3e forcing warriors to buy a similar ability with the cleave line of feats pretty much says all you need to know about 3e's design ethos.

I think the controversial element of 4e's minion rules was to diverge from simulationist monsters: monsters that have a specific, unchanging stats (say, 1-1HD goblins). 4e design is focused around what is needed for a combat, rather than what naturally exists in the fantasy world. Minions were the poster children for that type of design. Some people just couldn't or wouldn't adjust to that way of thinking. A lot of people also cried "Easy Mode!" when faced with monsters that went down like cardboard cutouts and didn't pose much threat. They saw them as weak tea monsters and not worth the trouble. I really enjoyed minions in 4e and used a ton of them to good effect, but they obviously weren't for everyone.

The difference between the 1e and 4e solutions is that in 1e, the warrior is empowered to fight hordes by virtue of their levels and class abilities; while in 4e the enemies were depowered to allow them to be defeated easily.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The difference between the 1e and 4e solutions is that in 1e, the warrior is empowered to fight hordes by virtue of their levels and class abilities; while in 4e the enemies were depowered to allow them to be defeated easily.

I don't think it's that clean-cut. 4E's minions were also empowered so that they could still hit reliably and do significant damage, unlike 1E monsters (who usually only hit on a 20 in this sort of situation). They weren't "weak tea", that's the thing - 10 minions had much better odds of killing a level 11 PC than ten, say, 1E Goblins did. With the math fix, anyway.

 

[Rod Staffwand]

I don't think it's that clean-cut. 4E's minions were also empowered so that they could still hit reliably and do significant damage, unlike 1E monsters (who usually only hit on a 20 in this sort of situation). They weren't "weak tea", that's the thing - 10 minions had much better odds of killing a level 11 PC than ten, say, 1E Goblins did. With the math fix, anyway.

I agree. In 4e, properly utilized minions can make for challenging and fun encounters.

 

[pemerton]

In Oriental Adventures, samurai and kensai got this ability (at 6th and 7th levels respectively):

The appearance of the character can cause fear in all creatures with 1 HD or less who fail a save vs breath weapon. Any characters or creatures struck by fear flee or surrender, depending on the circumstances.​

I don't think this ability was ever "mainstreamed", though: martial mind control!

 

[Manbearcat]

AD&D states that Fighters, Paladins and Rangers may attack once per each of their levels against 0-level humans or opponents with less than 1 hit die (1d8).

Cheers!

Hey MerricB. Thanks for chiming in. I was hoping you would. I thought Fighting the Unskilled was a Fighter only ability? I don't have my 1e books right next to me. I always played it was Fighters only at least. If it was extended to all of the Warrior classes, that would certainly be the genesis of the Minion system.

Mostly I was looking for a module/rule, akin to Fighting the Unskilled, that was either universally available or mostly so. Further, it scaled such that more powerful creatures (orcs etc) become minions as the heroes become truly powerful. Are you aware of anything like that in any Dragon mags through the years? I can't recall.

Good point, well made! I didn't think of that. Bloody Feats though...

3e forcing warriors to buy a similar ability with the cleave line of feats pretty much says all you need to know about 3e's design ethos.

Absolutely. I remember going from 1e UA Fighters with weapon spec and great saves, to 2e C&T Fighters with weapon spec, great saves, loads of fungible WPs that you could trade for NWPs to 3e Fighters with terrible everything. Holy awful Batman! It was pretty shocking for my long-time Fighter players.

I don't think it's that clean-cut. 4E's minions were also empowered so that they could still hit reliably and do significant damage, unlike 1E monsters (who usually only hit on a 20 in this sort of situation). They weren't "weak tea", that's the thing - 10 minions had much better odds of killing a level 11 PC than ten, say, 1E Goblins did. With the math fix, anyway.

And this is a good point. Minions (especially those that are force multiplied by a Leader - or the Leader uses to extend its own life, or are shifty and able to deploy damage and get out of harms way, or those with punitive control effects) can be absolutely brutal and a critical component of an exciting, terrifying, and intense combat experience for the PCs (and fun for the GM!).

In Oriental Adventures, samurai and kensai got this ability (at 6th and 7th levels respectively):

The appearance of the character can cause fear in all creatures with 1 HD or less who fail a save vs breath weapon. Any characters or creatures struck by fear flee or surrender, depending on the circumstances.​

I don't think this ability was ever "mainstreamed", though: martial mind control!

Wow. I wasn't aware of that ability in OA. An in sight aura that requires save vs BW or flee or surrender! Egad, that is worse MMC than CaGI and predates it by 25 years! That deserves its own thread!