Justifying high level 'guards', 'pirates', 'soldiers', 'assassins', etc.

[Celebrim]

I alwasy understood 'cinematic', at least in the context of rpgs, to mean something like 'modelling the conventions of drama more than modelling the conventions of real life'.

I'm not sure that there is a fixed definition. Alot of the terms bandied around with RPG's end up serving double or triple duty. I've certainly heard 'cinematic' used in that sense, but I never have really thought it very useful used in that way. For one thing, movie/dramatic conventions are not tightly established for fantasy, and certainly not for swords and sorcery, so I'd have a very hard time knowing what was being modeled.

Perhaps you can site for me the dramatic works which set the conventions of fantasy so I'd know what you meant by 'cinematic'.

For my part, I consider the game 'cinematic' (in my sense) if the rules encourage envisioning what the players do. For example, one area of play in D&D that I've always considered poorly cinematic is the attack. In D&D, the attack is abstract, so its up to the DM/player to provide the cinematic description. Very usually, this gets dull and so D&D defaults to, "I attack ... hit... and do 18 damage." This description, which is closely tied to the rules, is not cinematic. By contrast, game systems with called shots, contested active defenses, and tables of outcomes tend to have highly cinematic combat. So one argument for 4e being more cinematic would be, 'The manuevers provide cinematic details." While I think that they can, in practice though, I think the manuevers are abstract enough that in most cases they are simply different sorts of attacks, "I perform manuever X... hit... and 18 damage."

 

[Snoweel]

While I agree that immersion and cinematic don't share a direct relationship, your second paragraph is just...what?

No.

Immersion is a word that exists and means something. It has nothing to do with prep time. I. You. What?

How did you get that?

The more you are able to prepare the gameworld - the more time spent working on its development - the more immersive the play experience. The DM who knows the most detail about the gameworld is most able to deliver immersive description at the table. The more the players know about the gameworld, the more details will mean something to them, the more immersed they will be in the game.

 

[Snoweel]

Perhaps you can site for me the dramatic works which set the conventions of fantasy so I'd know what you meant by 'cinematic'.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Cinematic-Storytelling-Powerful-Conventions-Filmmaker/dp/193290705X]Amazon.com: Cinematic Storytelling: The 100 Most Powerful Film Conventions Every Filmmaker Must Know (9781932907056): Jennifer Van Sijll: Books[/ame]

In broad strokes, all the conventions of fiction are essentially the same. This applies to print as much as to film.

 

[S'mon]

IME, down-ranking NPCs does make the PCs feel like they've grown stronger. Let's assume, for example, that I decide the average King's Guard is worth 500 xp (a level 1 solo).
At level 1, Joe the fighter needs all four of his buddies to take down one of these Solos.
By level 6, Joe and Bob the rogue can beat the Elite just working together.
Level 10 and Joe can beat a Standard King's Guard all by his lonesome.
Once he's level 18 Joe can easily take on 5 of these Minions (DMG2 guidelines) without breaking a sweat.

I used to think this was the way to go, before I actually started running 4e. But really is there any reason not to make the King's Guard akways level 18 minions, whatever the PC's level? That indicates they're highly skilled but non-heroic. They operate in groups. If 1st level PCs get in a fight with some, they'll certainly get the 'they're out of our league' message, but maybe they'll get lucky and roll some 20s, and take down a few. As level 18 minions, they remain a threat at all levels. And you avoid grind. Edit: I probably wouldn't give more than 250 XP each; but minions are generally over-XP'd at all levels.

The only reason I can see to make one a Solo would be if you really needed them to fill a Solo roll in the adventure, eg they are the BBEG (in which case Elite stats would probably be better) or the party is being hunted by a bounty-hunter who's ex-Royal Guard.

Personally I'm very sceptical over use of Solos, except as dragons and similar huge lone beasties who might plausibly be extremely hard to kill.

 

[Gort]

I used to think this was the way to go, before I actually started running 4e. But really is there any reason not to make the King's Guard akways level 18 minions, whatever the PC's level?.

Yes. It stinks to miss a guy every time you attack him, which is what you'd get if you ran them as 18th level minions. It would also mean anyone who has an "auto-damage" aura, like fighters do, can mow through them like they were nothing.

If you make one a level 1 solo, people can attack and hit them without ending the fight, and the rather strange minion rules don't upset stuff.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I used to think this was the way to go, before I actually started running 4e. But really is there any reason not to make the King's Guard akways level 18 minions, whatever the PC's level? That indicates they're highly skilled but non-heroic. They operate in groups. If 1st level PCs get in a fight with some, they'll certainly get the 'they're out of our league' message, but maybe they'll get lucky and roll some 20s, and take down a few. As level 18 minions, they remain a threat at all levels. And you avoid grind. Edit: I probably wouldn't give more than 250 XP each; but minions are generally over-XP'd at all levels.

The only reason I can see to make one a Solo would be if you really needed them to fill a Solo roll in the adventure, eg they are the BBEG (in which case Elite stats would probably be better) or the party is being hunted by a bounty-hunter who's ex-Royal Guard.

Personally I'm very sceptical over use of Solos, except as dragons and similar huge lone beasties who might plausibly be extremely hard to kill.

What Gort said.

Also, King's Guard was just a name I picked out of a hat to use for my example. It could have just as easily been Elite Guild of Assassins in the employ of BBEG. While I've never actually used any creature in the above manner (having it appear as all 4 types: solo, elite, standard, and minion, at different levels in one campaign) I think it would be a pretty interesting way to demonstrate for the players just how much they've improved.

"Remember how this all started, when that Shadow Hand Ninja came after us and it was all we could do to fight him off and protect our town? Then there were those two Ninja brothers who nearly killed us. And who could forget the Five... But now we just hacked our way through their entire ninja guild and killed their leader... craziness!"

I've reskinned elites to standards to similar effect with success. (I've also had success with Solos, though I admit it's tricky in that you usually don't want them to actually go it solo).

The whole point of the above idea is to use a recurring enemy type to denote the PCs growth. You could use a level 18 minion in place of a level 1 solo, but then instead of giving the PCs the impression that the elite ninjas are mega bad*** you instead give them the impression that the ninja are mega pansies (albeit very skilled mega pansies only hit on a natural 20) who drop after one lucky shot or from getting too near a Flaming Sphere. The solo will give them a real battle whereas the minion gives them a whiff-fest until someone thinks to bring out the auto-damage or gets lucky (which could just as well be the first round of combat as a later one). High level minion is not the impression I want to give regarding an elite order of assassins that I intend to hunt the players into late paragon.

My PCs will feel plenty special after they exterminate the jerks that have been hounding them the past 18 levels without me arbitrarily restricting assassins to level 4 (or minion status). As I stated in my earlier post, IMO, restricting NPCs to such low levels produces an incoherent world (where everyone ought to have been eaten by ogres because they can't fight them off). NPCs should at least have the capacity to maintain their status quo under normal conditions. PCs are the people that get called in when those conditions change or when the NPCs decide they are tired of the status quo; the PCs are the movers and shakers.

Try thinking of it this way... when you alter a creature from standard to minion you increase its ability to hit while reducing damage (and conditions) and increasing its defenses while reducing its hps. Ability to hit and potential damage are both factors of its capacity to hurt you, just as defenses and hp are both factors of avoiding hurt. By increasing one but lowering the other you're (hypothetically) keeping the creature at the same hurt dealing and taking capacity, it's just that now it's more interesting to fight if you've scaled it right (because the PCs can hit it and it can hit the PCs). IME, fights are always better in D&D when both sides can hit.

 

[Celebrim]

Amazon.com: Cinematic Storytelling: The 100 Most Powerful Film Conventions Every Filmmaker Must Know (9781932907056): Jennifer Van Sijll: Books

In broad strokes, all the conventions of fiction are essentially the same. This applies to print as much as to film.

Ok sure, but earlier you were stating that 'cinematic' was in some way opposed to 'realistic'. But surely at least some films made according to those 100 most powerful film conventions have an air of gritty realism?

And even more to the point, is it really a convention of good 'cinematic' role play that the heroes always enter stage left? Is that what you were talking about when you said, "modelling the conventions of drama more than modelling the conventions of real life"?

 

[S'mon]

Yes. It stinks to miss a guy every time you attack him, which is what you'd get if you ran them as 18th level minions. It would also mean anyone who has an "auto-damage" aura, like fighters do, can mow through them like they were nothing.

If you make one a level 1 solo, people can attack and hit them without ending the fight, and the rather strange minion rules don't upset stuff.

As a player I'd much rather be trying to roll a '20' than trying to plow through the ca 200 hp that even a low level Solo gets. Especially if there are ten of them. Maybe in some kind of comedy bar fight with a drunken royal guard the solo rules would work ok.

I'm not sure what 1st level auto damage there is that would skew the fight? Missed attacks don't damage minions. All I can think of is something cheesy like hitting the barmaid so you can Cleave the adjacent royal guard?

 

[S'mon]

Hmm, I think the reason I've enjoyed using high level minions vs low level PCs is that it effectively signals "We're not in kansas anymore" to the players, and encourages them to withdraw quickly after a short, dramatic fight. Whereas using a bunch of elite or solo pinatas would have the opposite effect.

Now, the 9th level minions are Orc Warriors, who have a great to-hit (+14) and I increase their damage to 9 rather than 6, but a poor AC (21) - so they can be killed by 1st level PCs easily enough, but they also put a lot of hurt out. I do like the idea of the low level PCs encountering a horde of AC 34 20th level minion ninjas, though, and maybe killing one or two as they flee in terror.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Hmm, I think the reason I've enjoyed using high level minions vs low level PCs is that it effectively signals "We're not in kansas anymore" to the players, and encourages them to withdraw quickly after a short, dramatic fight. Whereas using a bunch of elite or solo pinatas would have the opposite effect.

Now, the 9th level minions are Orc Warriors, who have a great to-hit (+14) and I increase their damage to 9 rather than 6, but a poor AC (21) - so they can be killed by 1st level PCs easily enough, but they also put a lot of hurt out. I do like the idea of the low level PCs encountering a horde of AC 34 20th level minion ninjas, though, and maybe killing one or two as they flee in terror.

I can't think of a single time that I've felt the need to use creatures that utterly outclass the PCs in order to signal that they're "no longer in Kansas". IMO, outside of "Kansas" is better handled out of combat (free form role play or perhaps a skill challenge). If the PCs have no chance of winning, why play it out; isn't it more straightforward to say they get their butts kicked and skip to the daring but strategic withdrawal?

Short I can see, but what's so dramatic about missing with virtually every attack the PCs attempt? There's no tactics that one can employ when you need a nat 20 to hit; it's completely up to random chance (no player input). That's not the kind of drama I want to spotlight at my table (IMO the key to good drama is choice).

As for auto damage at level 1, the finest example I can think of is the Wizard's Flaming Sphere, which automatically deals damage to creatures that start their turns next to it and would probably eat your squad of level 20 ninja minions alive. Under ideal conditions it can kill up to 8 minions in a single round. The wizard conjures a ball of fire and suddenly half a dozen of the world's deadliest assassins go down like scarecrows... epic...

My reference regarding the level 1 solo was an NPC that the PCs are intended to fight (perhaps the campaign centers around a rebellion and the that King's Guardsman has been hunting the PC rebels). It wouldn't be a comedic bar fight in the least. It might be a bit of a slap in the face to know that the King assumed it would only take one of his elite guards to wipe out their little insurrection, but that will just give the players even more reason to hate him. A well made solo impresses on the PCs that it was a very tough opponent, minus the virtual guarantee of a TPK (which I try to avoid as a routine occurrence as I find it impedes investment in the characters on the part of the players). That's assuming that he's properly paired with a few complementary creatures (perhaps some merc bounty hunters the Guardsman hired to assist him); it can be a very tough fight which the PCs will remember for some time. The trick to solos is to never use them alone if you want a tough fight.

If "over-leveled" minions work for you, great! I definitely don't see it as being a good fit for my games at the very least, for the aforementioned reasons.