Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Voss" data-source="post: 4231334" data-attributes="member: 57593">I didn't.  I just claimed that the number of rules in 3e, good or bad, was completely irrelevant as to whether or not the minion rule was good or bad.Actually, I do.  Because thats what the rules say.  If you do one point of damage to any of those things, they are dead or destroyed.  Its an absurdity, but its the games absurdity, not mine. But can we go back to the minion rules, because I was certainly never criticizing it based on 3e.  I was criticizing it based on the fact that its internally inconsistent with other parts of 4e.@Thasmodious- The problem is, this isn't a corner case.  All minions die when they take at least 1 point of damage from a direct hit.  It doesn't matter what the source is, or anything else, just that attack hits and does measurable damage.  There aren't any exceptions involved- the attacker doesn't have to be of an appropriate level, a PC or be wearing a blue scarf under the moon- the attacker just has to hit it with a damaging attack.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.</blockquote>

Verification