Excerpt: Minions. Go forth mine minions! Bring havoc with your 1 hp [merged]

Voss said:
Furthermore, when you have 5 types of kobolds in a room, and 4 can take 20 to 30 times they damage of the other, there is a verisimilitude issue that isn't even vaguely corner case. Its really that 1 out of 5 kobolds will die to a dagger thrust, while the other 4 *won't die* if hit with a greatsword. Maybe that doesn't bother you. It does bother me, and it certainly isn't more or less intelligent to ignore it than to point it out. Its a matter of playstyle preference. I enjoy games more if they are internally consistent, and if they stand up to a little thoughtful analysis.

I think a large part of this comes with the new definition of HP. Now I don't really want to bring that whole fight in here, enough people are discussing what hp actually represents. From a 4e design standpoint though what it seems to represent is nothing truly physical or an aspect of morale. It seems to me at least that hp is now meant purely as a representation of their plot worth. The max hp is the representation of how important they are to the story, and the current result is a value of how close they are to leaving it.

Technically EVERYONE should die if they are hit with a greatsword. However some foes are supposed to be more memorable, therefore they slip out of the way or are simply tougher. Think of the leader of the Uruk-hai, he was a regular monster while the rest where minions. They could still do damage en masse(and even kill "players") yet died relatively quickly when brought to combat. Also compare them to normal orcs, who are essentially lower level minions.

I think of it instead as a single one of the monsters was not as well trained as the other four, they are a real challenge for the pcs, this guy is the newbie in the group, or was simply unlucky. Regardless it allows in a sense for more cinematic play that enforces verisimilitude. Instead of having 20 level 1 orcs against your level 10 pcs (who know for a fact that they can't touch them since they are level 10) instead the weak guys that drop like flies actually matter in the battle.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Voss said:
I was criticizing it based on the fact that its internally inconsistent with other parts of 4e.

Furthermore, when you have 5 types of kobolds in a room, and 4 can take 20 to 30 times they damage of the other, there is a verisimilitude issue that isn't even vaguely corner case. Its really that 1 out of 5 kobolds will die to a dagger thrust, while the other 4 *won't die* if hit with a greatsword. Maybe that doesn't bother you. It does bother me, and it certainly isn't more or less intelligent to ignore it than to point it out. Its a matter of playstyle preference. I enjoy games more if they are internally consistent, and if they stand up to a little thoughtful analysis.

I find that most of 4e does stand up better to thoughtful analysis than 3e does. However, there are specific subsystems, like this one, that do not stand up well to analysis.

I think it's not standing up because the way it's being viewed is being done so in a way that won't stand up.

In my opinion:

1. ALL creature and things die when you hit them with a deadly attack.

2. All attacks made are intended to be deadly. This means if you need a 10 or higher to kill something, you have a 50% chance to kill it. Period. 50% chance to stab it through the heart, make it cease to be. A fighter can't take multiple deadly attacks. He can ony take one.

3. Armor represents a physical defense. Things like skill and stuff are represented by a level bonus. You've learned to get out of the way. Things like Dex improve this. It's easier to use your skill to get out of the way of a killing blow because you are nimble. But a good hit is still a good hit. You DIE.

4. Hit points represent somethign else. A passive defense almost. A will to live, luck, the force, extra quaters in the machine, or what I like to call MOXIE. You might want to call it Mojo.

5. Moxie turns things tht should be hits into near misses, or flesh wounds. It's a way of stackign the deck in your favor. Again it is NOT the ability to take multiple killing blows. It's a way to take somethign that SHOULD have been a killing blow, and negate that.

6. Not everyone has Moxie.

7. On a game level Moxie / Hit Points = bonus defensive percentage points.

8. When you run out of HPs you are pretty much a normal person. You luck is up. You have no more bonus perentage points to stack things in your favor. A hit kills you. A miss does not.
 

OK, Voss, we'll agree to differ about the nature of hit points and game rules generally, I guess.

So here's my minion question: how often do you all think they should be used? When planning encounters, do you think they should be in 10% of encounters? 30%? 50%? more?

I know it often depends on the needs of the situation. But I guess I'm asking, how much do you all plan to use minions? In the toolbox, will it be an important tool like a hammer or a specialty one, like, um, a stone polisher? (I wouldn't know a specialty tool if someone threw it at me for 1hp damage.)
 

Scribble said:
4. Hit points represent somethign else. A passive defense almost. A will to live, luck, the force, extra quaters in the machine, or what I like to call MOXIE. You might want to call it Mojo.
That's nothing new. It's all about the dude field. However, since in 4E you're using powers, now your attacks are also loaded with dude factor, helping you to penetrate the opponent's dude field. In fact, some attacks - those that do damage on a miss - are not only consisting of a real attack, but also of raw dude factor, so even if the attack misses, your dude factor still weakens the dude field of your opponent.

Minions has no dude field, so it's easy to penetrate it, killing the minion. On a miss, however, your attack only deals damage (despite the miss), because it's your dude factor ablating the enemies dude field. But a minion has no dude field to ablate, hence you deal no damage on a miss to a minion.

Cheers, LT.
 

Lord Tirian said:
That's nothing new. It's all about the dude field. However, since in 4E you're using powers, now your attacks are also loaded with dude factor, helping you to penetrate the opponent's dude field. In fact, some attacks - those that do damage on a miss - are not only consisting of a real attack, but also of raw dude factor, so even if the attack misses, your dude factor still weakens the dude field of your opponent.

Minions has no dude field, so it's easy to penetrate it, killing the minion. On a miss, however, your attack only deals damage (despite the miss), because it's your dude factor ablating the enemies dude field. But a minion has no dude field to ablate, hence you deal no damage on a miss to a minion.

Cheers, LT.

Exactly!

Damage on a miss isn't physical damage either. (Until that 1 hit point of killing blow.)

It's your Moxie (dudeness) battling it out with the othwer guy's Moxie (dudeness) in an attempt to cosmicaly prove who's the one who stands.
 

Oddly, I'm using hit points as a complete abstraction. When something reaches 0 hit points its down/dead/whatever (personally I prefer unconscious at 0, and dead at Con, but thats not particularly relevant). I'm perfectly comfortable with that level of abstraction, so I'm comfortable with hitting a kobold 3 times before it goes 'down'. What I'm not comfortable with is the idea that is true for these kobolds, but not for those kobolds. I don't care enough to justify the abstraction, but I want it to be consistent. This isn't.


Another weird thing that the minion rules encourage:

Hrothgar the Mighty has made his name with his great axe, Dragon-hewer. But those who follow the saga of Hrothgar the Mighty have noted a peculiar quirk that Hrothgar exhibits in battle. At times he is seen to discard the axe he values so highly, and pull out a wicked dagger that he calls Minion-Poker. When asked about this behavior by a brave bard over many cups of ale, Hrothgar said:

'What am I, an idiot? I've got an extra 10% chance to hit with this thing, and it doesn't matter how much damage I do!'
 
Last edited:

Rex Blunder said:
OK, agree to differ about the nature of game rules, I guess.

So here's my minion question: how often do you think they should be used? When planning encounters, do you think they should be in 10% of encounters? 30%? 50%? more?

I know it often depends on the needs of the situation. But I guess I'm asking, how much do you all plan to use minions? In the toolbox, will it be an important tool like a hammer or a specialty one, like, um, a stone polisher? (I wouldn't know a specialty tool if someone threw it at me for 1hp damage.)

I plan to mostly use minions to represent monsters that the party is just more powerful then as a whole. So I may not use kobold minions and regular kobolds together at first level, because I just like the idea that all kobolds are a threat at that level. But if the party is 6th level fighting gnolls who use kobolds as shock troops then those kobolds will now be minions...even if they are the exact same ones they fought at lvl 1.

If I do use minions at first level they will probably be things like large rats or half starved kobolds in loincloths.....things you'd only expect to be threatening to an armed and armored person in large numbers. Exact percentages would probably depend on the scene I'm trying to create.
 

The kobold that goes down in 3 hits, is the one that manages to block part of the attack with his shield, or slip to the side so only his tail gets hit, etc. The kobold that goes down in one hit is the one that is distracted for a second and has his head lobbed off in one hit.

As for the dagger, Hrothgar the Mighty doesn't know what is or isn't a minion. The concept wouldn't make sense to him, the kobold he chopped down in one hit was because of his luck, the kobolds unluckiness, circumstances, skill, etc. The kobold that went down in three was because he was better on his feet, dodged more often, etc.

Thus pulling out a dagger for specific target wouldn't make sense since he has no clue if he will impale that dagger into the kobold's eye anymore that it will simply brush off the kobold's armour.
 

Voss said:
Oddly, I'm using hit points as a complete abstraction. When something reaches 0 hit points its down/dead/whatever. I'm perfectly comfortable with that level of abstraction, so I'm comfortable with hitting a kobold 3 times before it goes 'down'. What I'm not comfortable with is the idea that is true for these kobolds, but not for those kobolds. I don't care enough to justify the abstraction, but I want it to be consistent. This isn't.

So you're arguing that the minion rules are too realistic? :D

Voss said:
Another weird thing that the minion rules encourage:

Hrothgar the Mighty has made his name with his great axe, Dragon-hewer. But those who follow the saga of Hrothgar the Mighty have noted a peculiar quirk that Hrothgar exhibits in battle. At times he is seen to discard the axe he values so highly, and pull out a wicked dagger that he calls Minion-Poker. When asked about this behavior by a brave bard over many cups of ale, Hrothgar said:

'What am I, an idiot? I've got an extra 10% chance to hit with this thing, and it doesn't matter how much damage I do!'
It seems like that's only a problem if minion status is too obvious. Like I said before, I think there' won't be any visual difference between minions and standard monsters in my campaign (elites and solos will stand out I think). If your players start doing this just increase the percentage of regular monsters relative to the number of minions.
 

Voss said:
Hrothgar the Mighty has made his name with his great axe, Dragon-hewer. But those who follow the saga of Hrothgar the Mighty have noted a peculiar quirk that Hrothgar exhibits in battle. At times he is seen to discard the axe he values so highly, and pull out a wicked dagger that he calls Minion-Poker. When asked about this behavior by a brave bard over many cups of ale, Hrothgar said:

'What am I, an idiot? I've got an extra 10% chance to hit with this thing, and it doesn't matter how much damage I do!'

Actually that would only be true in 2 cases....

1) The dagger and the axe had the same enhancement bonus
2) Hrothgar has an equal strength and dex (daggers use dex to hit)

If Hrothgar were known for his great speed and agility and had an epic dagger of equal reknown to dragon-hewer then I have no problem imagining him using the dagger to dispatch weaker foes.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top