Judicious use and description of Minions [Edit-Now asking for stat analysis]

[Ginnel]

I don't believe minions should be pointed out but neither should the DM try to trick players into wasting power, examples follow

1) An Ogre chieftan stands over the fire, two heavily armed Goblins with swords and shields are standing either side of him while a Goblin with painted tattoos and died skin is incanting on the opposite side of the fire, around the clearing a number of Goblins stand hollering, playing crude instruments and dancing.

Now in this example it would be ok for all of the said monsters to not be minions
It would also be fine to have the ogre, his 2 bodyguards and the shaman as elites/normal monsters with the rest of the tribe as minions.
Personally I think it would also be fine to hide in some non minion goblins in the surrounding tribe as well as minions

What I don't think would be fine would be to have the Ogre or his bodyguards as a minion or even the chanting goblin.

If players insist on leading with a single target encounter/daily against a threat they haven't assessed yet more fool them

 

[Lurker37]

I tend to think of minions as all having near-identical appearance. Not in hair coulour etc, but they all have the same gear. And they're taking orders from someone there if it's not an all-minion encounter.

Furthermore, the fact that the encounter outnumbers the party, clues the players in that there are minions, so they should already be looking for these tells.

What would not work IMO is a knowledge check to 'identify monster', since minions are a template used for an encounter mechanic, rather than a creature type per se. It's not that the monsters are necessarily sickly. They could simply be unlucky, or fated to die this day, or what have you.

 

[vladbat]

I got into this with one of my players after our last session. He wants there to be a game mechanic that specifically tells him if something is a minion or not. He admits that he can figure out which ones are based on my descriptions (and the fact that there are so many identical mini's on the board) but feels like he is meta-gaming to figure it all out.
I hate explicitly talking meta-game at the table. Hobgoblin Phalanx soldier ability becomes "as you are about to strike your opponent his ally leans in and blocks your striike with his shield." Minions become "these kobolds don't appear anywhere near as large or strong as the ones with the shields. Their gear has a scavenged look about it: a collection of bits and pieces of others leavings."
Isn't this what the thread is really about? how much meta-game do you want to talk?

 

[Arbitrary]

Even a simple explanation after I've placed figs pretty much tells the players what is a minion and what isn't. These two have bows, these have longswords and heavy shields, this guy is in a robe, these six all have short swords."

Well duh.

 

[Dausuul]

I'm pretty open about my use of minions. I don't usually describe them as "minions" per se, but I make it clear that these guys are smaller, weaker, and less well-equipped than the "main bad guy" (or bad guys) in the back, and my players draw the obvious conclusion - if not right away, then as soon as one of the minions drops in a single hit.

I don't feel this is excessive metagaming. I think of it this way: If you're a group of knights in plate, your opponents will include a) a bunch of peasants with sticks, and b) your opposite numbers, the guys who are as well-equipped and well-armed as you are. It's not unrealistic that you'd rate the peasants a lot lower on your personal threat meter, and try to conserve your strength for the "real fight."

As for hiding regular guys among the minions, I don't rule out the possibility entirely, but it's not something I would normally do. There would have to be special circumstances for it - like a sneaky BBEG who's trying to slip past the PCs by looking like an unimportant thug. Otherwise it's just a cheap trick to harass the players.

 

[PeelSeel2]

When I DM minions, I never describe them any different than the other monsters they are with. I always mix them in groups of regular ones. That way the players never know which is which. It makes the battles more interesting.

 

[Jasperak]

I got into this with one of my players after our last session. He wants there to be a game mechanic that specifically tells him if something is a minion or not. He admits that he can figure out which ones are based on my descriptions (and the fact that there are so many identical mini's on the board) but feels like he is meta-gaming to figure it all out.
I hate explicitly talking meta-game at the table. Hobgoblin Phalanx soldier ability becomes "as you are about to strike your opponent his ally leans in and blocks your striike with his shield." Minions become "these kobolds don't appear anywhere near as large or strong as the ones with the shields. Their gear has a scavenged look about it: a collection of bits and pieces of others leavings."
Isn't this what the thread is really about? how much meta-game do you want to talk?

That is one of the reasons why I started the thread. I will illustrate some of my concerns with a little story.

My dwarven fighter named Kiatis had moved to engage a group of kobolds in their lair. He picked the largest group though they looked weaker. He used his cleave to great effect until some skirmishers joined the fight hoping for some dwarf burgers. After a string of terrible rolls, Kiatis started using Reaping strike when others had taken the skirmishers hit points down. Behold though Reaping strike was ineffective against some creatures. They were immune.

A second wave of kobolds moved in and then the Wrympriest used his Incite Faith ability granting all of his allies 5 extra hit points. Now we had Regular skirmishers and soldiers interspersed with minions that had 6 hit points! Even if we used the house rule of one hit makes them bloodied and another kills them We still had no idea who was a minion and who wasn't. Reaping strike may or may not work.

That little episode seemed to undermine the whole point of minions. I thought they were supposed to make the party feel tough, make the combat seem more cinematic. Lack of meta-game talk hamstrung the party with its combat options (not just the fighter in the excerpt above.) In this case the combat became an exercise in frustration. In the middle of this combat, the game rules changed and it seemed that RAW there was no way to explain it or even discuss it within the party without resorting to meta-game constructs.

This in the showcase module of the new edition. I want to like the minions, but I have to find a place for them in the game reality. All of your responses help to fit them in.

 

[Togetic]

My method is 1) at the beginning of battle, you get a description. Often, if there are 10^23 creatures that look the same, and one that does not, odds are that the numerous ones are minions. 2) Players may make knowledge checks, and so long as they get the monster name/role then I tell them that they are minions. 3) If all else fails, when a minion deals or takes damage, I make it clear if they are not rolling damage or they are one-shotted. That definitely clues everyone in. I think the players should be rewarded for refraining from using their daily powers until they've felt out the encounter. If someone is about to use a daily power on a minion (which I have done... but now I know better, and I don't blame the DM), I'm not going to stop them. But I'll make it obvious that the guy was reduced to a fine paste.

 

[Togetic]

A second wave of kobolds moved in and then the Wrympriest used his Incite Faith ability granting all of his allies 5 extra hit points. Now we had Regular skirmishers and soldiers interspersed with minions that had 6 hit points! Even if we used the house rule of one hit makes them bloodied and another kills them We still had no idea who was a minion and who wasn't. Reaping strike may or may not work.

Is there any restriction against minions receiving temporary hit points? It seems to me that if a healing effect is used on a minion, they still max out at 1/1 hp. On the other hand, if they're receiving temporary hit points, that seems to throw the entire XP allocation system out of whack because now they are relatively more powerful.

 

[Jasperak]

Is there any restriction against minions receiving temporary hit points? It seems to me that if a healing effect is used on a minion, they still max out at 1/1 hp. On the other hand, if they're receiving temporary hit points, that seems to throw the entire XP allocation system out of whack because now they are relatively more powerful.

There is no restriction in the module (KotS) that the DM used to run the combat. And yes 1/2 dozen minions gaining an extra hit would throw the balance of the combat off. Imagine a dwarf surrounded by 3 three minions. Cleave on a successful hit takes out two, but only one after their bonus hit points are added. And if the dwarf doesn't attack, for whatever reason the correct one in the next round, it could take three rounds to kill three minions.

But that is not why I started this thread. I started it because a game construct (minions) tries to add a cinematic flair to combat, but is vague on the best way to describe it without resorting to meta-game thinking. I love the idea of throwing a dozen minions at the party and having their fighters cleave through them to get to the big bad guy. What I think I have a problem with is seeing a similar set of creatures within that dozen or so creatures that play by different rules. Such a problem that the minions cause a slow-down in combat as the players analyze the battlefield to determine who is whom. After a dozen rounds of combat keeping track of what miniature is what can be a pain when you are still looking at a dozen that are left from the beginning of combat that started an hour before. Not conducive to players like me that prefer to drink liberally while we play.

I think that part of me still likes and feels more comfortable with the Goblin, Hobgoblin, Bugbear paradigm of combat.