D&D 4E 4e Dungeon Design - New Article

[The_Universe]

I too am intrigued by the idea of "minion rules," but I really do hope they go the Mutants and Masterminds route with them, rather than making separate minion stats for every monster, or something...

 

[Grog]

What I've never claimed and what I'm skeptical of is that fixes to the mechanics of the CR/EL system - the mechanics Mearls chooses to focus on in the article - would make it easier to run large groups of mooks against high level characters and still challenge them, while simultaneously running large groups of mooks against low level characters and not risking a TPK. First level characters aren't threated by 20 goblins because of the CR/EL system. They are threated by 20 goblins because they are 1st level characters. All the CR/EL system attempts to do is systematically document that.

You're absolutely right that changing the CR/EL system would not allow 1st level 3E characters to fight 20 goblins. But what you have to remember is that it's not just the CR/EL system that's being changed. The whole D&D combat encounter system is being rebuilt from the ground up to allow for larger battles like 20 goblins vs. 4 1st level PCs. The underlying math is being changed.

I probably shouldn't have said that it's 3E's CR/EL system that breaks down when dealing with large numbers of foes. That's not quite right. It's the 3E paradigm of how combat encounters should work that doesn't really allow for battles like that (the paradigm that says that a typical encounter should consume 20-25% of the party's resources). It looks to me like that paradigm is being changed - and if so, I'm all for it.

Why I need a vague gamist concept like 'minion' to balance a monster against PC's I'm not sure. It might superficially sound ok for orcs to be mooks, but then its a concept of utility only at very low levels of play. If the concept scales, then its going to create really weird situations like 'minion' ogres, 'minion' fire giants, 'minion' priests of Set, 'minion' 10th level fighters, 'minion' dragons, etc. depending on what BBEG has as minions and what the level of the PC's is. One guys minion is another guys boss.

Yes, I definitely agree with you on this. The "minion" concept is perfect for a game like M&M because it fits the flavor of the genre - Batman and Robin never have trouble beating up the hordes of faceless thugs they run up against. But it's not a good fit for D&D. I might be okay with it if it was kept strictly as a very low-level concept - but even then, I think it really cheapens monsters like orcs, who are supposed to pose at least some level of threat to low-level PCs.

And also, you run into the question of what makes some orcs "minions" and others not. I'll wait and see what they have planned, but right now, I'm not liking the concept.

 

[Rechan]

I'm more of the mind that this "Minion" rules would simulate something like the mines from LotR - the PCs chopping through a veritable swarm of opponents. This makes even more sense at higher levels, when your fighter should be able to mow through small armies.

 

[Grog]

I'm more of the mind that this "Minion" rules would simulate something like the mines from LotR - the PCs chopping through a veritable swarm of opponents. This makes even more sense at higher levels, when your fighter should be able to mow through small armies.

But high-level characters can already chop through swarms of orcs. Why do we need minion rules for that?

 

[Rechan]

Probably so they can do it earlier.

But I think the rules are just there so that if DMs want to throw that many opponents at PCs without fearing a TPK at low levels, they can.

 

[Grog]

Probably so they can do it earlier.

But I think the rules are just there so that if DMs want to throw that many opponents at PCs without fearing a TPK at low levels, they can.

Well, I'd rather see that accomplished without adding a mechanic that, IMO, really doesn't fit with the flavor of D&D. The nameless thugs that Batman and Robin fight aren't supposed to be a serious threat; but, last time I checked, orcs are supposed to be a serious threat to low-level D&D characters.

 

[Rechan]

Well, I'd rather see that accomplished without adding a mechanic that, IMO, really doesn't fit with the flavor of D&D. The nameless thugs that Batman and Robin fight aren't supposed to be a serious threat; but, last time I checked, orcs are supposed to be a serious threat to low-level D&D characters.

Orcs, yes.

Kobolds, Goblins and Skeletons? Not really.

It would be nice if an NPC necromancer could have more than a dozen skeletons under his control without being an excessively high level.

 

[Skyscraper]

I'm glad that low-level encounters will now allow use of several opponents without immediately being TPK threats. This goes along the lines of their announcement that there'll be better survivability at level 1 i guess.

This being said, what's this rambling about monsters actually reacting to battle in the next room? Are we supposed to read this and say "ohhhh, neat, monster not dumb anymore: monster hear fight, monster open door, monster hit wizard on head with big stick"? Man. Heh

 

[KingCrab]

Ditto!

This preview was really interesting, but I have to say, that lizardman has a serious case of overbite!

Makes him rather cute. I'd hate to have to mercilessly bludgeon him to death.

 

[KingCrab]

Interesting stuff. More dynamic encounters. Monsters actually responding to what's going on around them. Massively out numbered PCs. Sounds sweet!

They are going to have to really speed up the combat if these huge battles are going to fit into a gaming session. I'm talking about slashing down time by more than a factor of two, because it sounds like they're planning on more than doubling the number of creatures in an encounter.