D&D General Why is D&D 4E a "tactical" game?

[Oofta]

Just to be clear: I have no problem with minions. But I prefer that a level 1 party can face an ogre and that a level 10 party could face the exact same dozen ogres (same monster, same stat block) and that it still works. It didn't work in 4E - after 5 or so levels CR lower a monster that was a threat is no longer a threat. It was stated that you could still throw the same ogres, but you would use a higher level minion version of the ogres. Or I just totally misunderstood.

I'd respond do neonchameleon but he responded twice and then blocked me. Oh well, guess I'll never know.

 

[Teemu]

I do like the relative simplicity of how 5e and PF2 handle minions or mooks, in that you use creatures of a much lower CR/level, no need to find or create minions. In practice though this seems to only work from lowish to mid levels. Goblins and wolves and cultists are simple enemies in 5e and PF2, so if you add them in bulk to an encounter, they’re fairly easy and quick to run. However, when you want minions in a higher level game, these weak monsters no longer provide any threat at all, especially in PF2 where AC and saves go up with level. Thus you have to dig into the mid tier monsters and NPCs, and there lies the problem: most of these creatures are designed to be run as solo or pair enemies, with the complexity to match. Multiattack, auras, lots of spells, more complex special abilities; they get too much to function as easy-to-run mooks. The promise of simplicity falls apart, as I found out in my first high level 5e game (I was absolutely disappointed).

In addition, weaker enemies often don’t really provide a threat even in numbers because spells in 5e, and both spells and strikes in PF2 thanks to its crit rules, demolish masses of weaker creatures almost automatically. 4e minions work better in practice because they have attacks and defenses relative to the PCs’ capabilities; you can’t automatically wipe out seven minions with fireball, and the minions’ attacks can very much deal a bit of damage. Both approaches have pros and cons, but the 4e version does provide the best gameplay results.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

I'm not "railing against" anything. Just explaining a preference. You do know that people can have preferences without making naughty word up, right?

Just to be clear: I have no problem with minions. But I prefer that a level 1 party can face an ogre and that a level 10 party could face the exact same dozen ogres (same monster, same stat block) and that it still works. It didn't work in 4E - after 5 or so levels CR lower a monster that was a threat is no longer a threat. It was stated that you could still throw the same ogres, but you would use a higher level minion version of the ogres. Or I just totally misunderstood.

I'd respond do neonchameleon but he responded twice and then blocked me. Oh well, guess I'll never know.

You have preference for a very specific mechanical representation. And? Good for you.

The blocking and arguing is against your insistance on applying another edition paradigmn to 4e to point out that 4e leads to absuridty and as the "justification" for your preference, when clearly using a different paradigmn would result in a system that 'makes sense' within its own context. You seem to be incapable of taking a different mindset (even if you don't like it) to ackowledge that for instance the same fictional positioned Ogre can be represented as a standard monster to a low level party and a minion relative to a higher level party ("minionization"). Maybe you prefer the other way, but it can be done Horatio!

If your entire position is " I prefer that a level 1 party can face an ogre and that a level 10 party could face the exact same dozen ogres (same monster, same stat block) and that it still works. "

Ok? So what? You have a preference for how to mechanically represent a tough threat that becomes an easy threat to higher level characters? And?

If that's it, let's move on.

 

[Oofta]

I do like the relative simplicity of how 5e and PF2 handle minions or mooks, in that you use creatures of a much lower CR/level, no need to find or create minions. In practice though this seems to only work from lowish to mid levels. Goblins and wolves and cultists are simple enemies in 5e and PF2, so if you add them in bulk to an encounter, they’re fairly easy and quick to run. However, when you want minions in a higher level game, these weak monsters no longer provide any threat at all, especially in PF2 where AC and saves go up with level. Thus you have to dig into the mid tier monsters and NPCs, and there lies the problem: most of these creatures are designed to be run as solo or pair enemies, with the complexity to match. Multiattack, auras, lots of spells, more complex special abilities; they get too much to function as easy-to-run mooks. The promise of simplicity falls apart, as I found out in my first high level 5e game (I was absolutely disappointed).

In addition, weaker enemies often don’t really provide a threat even in numbers because spells in 5e, and both spells and strikes in PF2 thanks to its crit rules, demolish masses of weaker creatures almost automatically. 4e minions work better in practice because they have attacks and defenses relative to the PCs’ capabilities; you can’t automatically wipe out seven minions with fireball, and the minions’ attacks can very much deal a bit of damage. Both approaches have pros and cons, but the 4e version does provide the best gameplay results.

To make relatively low level monsters work in 5E you have a couple of options. One is to use mobs as discussed in the DMG. Something I do occasionally is to take low level monsters and give them power-ups, a temporary bump to attack bonus and/or advantage to hit and then also increase their damage. They're more of an immediate threat but more difficult to kill.

Another way is Tucker's kobolds. The monsters don't directly confront the PCs but instead lay traps, use indirect attacks along with hit-and-run tactics.

I wouldn't use any of these options all the time, but once in a while it can be fun.

 

[Campbell]

My favorite way to handle mooks personally is some sort of mob/swarm/battle group mechanic. I think individually representing significant numbers of monsters/NPCs slows down play way too much. As a GM I just do not want to be going through 15+ individual turns like ever. I do want to have fights against those large groups though. The Dune Quickstart taught me that even if a single success means an enemy is taken out large numbers of enemies are still a bear to deal with.

 

[Oofta]

You have preference for a very specific mechanical representation. And? Good for you.

The blocking and arguing is against your insistance on applying another edition paradigmn to 4e to point out that 4e leads to absuridty and as the "justification" for your preference, when clearly using a different paradigmn would result in a system that 'makes sense' within its own context. You seem to be incapable of taking a different mindset (even if you don't like it) to ackowledge that for instance the same fictional positioned Ogre can be represented as a standard monster to a low level party and a minion relative to a higher level party ("minionization"). Maybe you prefer the other way, but it can be done Horatio!

If your entire position is " I prefer that a level 1 party can face an ogre and that a level 10 party could face the exact same dozen ogres (same monster, same stat block) and that it still works. "

Ok? So what? You have a preference for how to mechanically represent a tough threat that becomes an easy threat to higher level characters? And?

If that's it, let's move on.

I stated a preference that I like that something like ogres can still be a threat at higher levels, you just need to throw more. That's all I was trying to say. I thought we were talking about using minions to represent weaker monsters, I was just pointing out that it's a different solution to the problem and that I prefer 5E's solution.

Then I was accused of misrepresenting how 4E worked, somehow I was creating a new rule about "minionizing" existing monsters or something which I really did not understand. I tried to move on but people kept repeating that I was misrepresenting 4E or that I was trolling.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

I stated a preference that I like that something like ogres can still be a threat at higher levels, you just need to throw more. That's all I was trying to say. I thought we were talking about using minions to represent weaker monsters, I was just pointing out that it's a different solution to the problem and that I prefer 5E's solution.

Then I was accused of misrepresenting how 4E worked, somehow I was creating a new rule about "minionizing" existing monsters or something which I really did not understand. I tried to move on but people kept repeating that I was misrepresenting 4E or that I was trolling.

Sure. You know the old posts are visible right?

 

[MwaO]

Not quite what I meant. Every ogre can be different if you want, but the same ogre should be the same IMO regardless of who is encountering them and what level they happen to be.

If you play any kind of competitive sport at a high level of play, the way that players react to much better players is usually wildly different than how they play someone worse than them.

In a beginning fencing class I took in college, I walked through the entire class without even breaking a sweat — at the time, I was a pretty competitive table tennis player and at one specific point, maybe the top player at a 50K student university. The #2 guy laughingly suggested I should challenge the professor, I tried to demure, and the prof heard it and challenged me.

And he defeated me in 2 seconds flat. And I knew something like that would happen, so I tried to be defensive rather than do the tricks I was using on the class.

I was the same opponent, but instead of being an elite or solo to my classmates, I was a minion to my professor.549cxeoprw r7ojkm32,w

 

[Oofta]

Sure. You know the old posts are visible right?

If someone has you blocked you cannot see their posts. As far as possible misunderstandings, I tried to get clarification only to be told that I was gaslighting. I played a lot of 4E, I understand how the system works. It's been repeatedly said that I am mischaracterizing the game.

 

[Oofta]

If you play any kind of competitive sport at a high level of play, the way that players react to much better players is usually wildly different than how they play someone worse than them.

In a beginning fencing class I took in college, I walked through the entire class without even breaking a sweat — at the time, I was a pretty competitive table tennis player and at one specific point, maybe the top player at a 50K student university. The #2 guy laughingly suggested I should challenge the professor, I tried to demure, and the prof heard it and challenged me.

And he defeated me in 2 seconds flat. And I knew something like that would happen, so I tried to be defensive rather than do the tricks I was using on the class.

I was the same opponent, but instead of being an elite or solo to my classmates, I was a minion to my professor.549cxeoprw r7ojkm32,w

Sure. A single CR 2 ogre to 10th level party is going to be a speedbump. There are many ways of representing that in the game.