Minion Status: Private or Public?

[webrunner]

I don't see how keeping minions secret vs. open affect players making their own choices, other than the fact that secret minions would lead players to be wary of opening combat with their daily powers.

Why would you open combat with a daily power against a large enemy force unless it's a wide-clearing attack anyway, in which case it helps regardless if they're minions or normals or elites. A single-target daily against a big force is just.. silly, isn't it?

 

[Aservan]

I have done a play-test of 4th and it sounds noble and right to say that you won't tell your players who the minions are. It is a load of crud though.

Many of us will play with minis. it just makes things easier and helps cut down on arguments about who is where and when. In 4th given how tactically complex the game has become they are almost required to get the whole experience. Since I have no intention of labeling every mini with a number (I am too lazy and there are A LOT of minis) I use different minis for each type of bad guy. Generally as close as I can get to what the monster actually looks like. So a dragon shield Kobold is a kobold with a shield. Simple and it is clear to players and DM.

My players are not retarded. They can see the Kobold miner Minis and guess that those would be the minions. Now obviously I can have one of them secretly be the big bad kobold boss (kobolds are sneaky like that), but that is kinda gimmicky and only likely to work once (especially after the swarm gets burst damaged and only one kobold is standing). For my sanity and the players speed of play most of the time they are gonna know who the minions are even if I don't explicitly tell them.

Heck players read these boards too. Trying to separate player and character knowledge is usually an exercise in futility. At least during combat.

Kudos to people for being high minded. Most of you are not being realistic about what will happen in the game though.

 

[Protagonist]

"That unit of Warrior Vixens have no armor on their midriffs, one good slice there should spill their guts to the ground."

I think this insight illustrates the brilliance of WotC's 4E marketing. It all started decades ago with the depiction of female minions of all races and classes in almost all rulebooks. Now that's a great way to raise awareness for a new game mechanic!

 

[ZetaStriker]

I don't see a problem with not explicitly telling the players who the mooks are. Generally, it'll become obvious within the first turn of combat anyway, which isn't any different from any of the movie examples people get bringing up where 'the mooks are obvious'. I mean, who can honestly say they'd confuse a Kobold Sharpshooter's unique ammo types, a Dragonshield's offensive power, or a Wyrmpriest's magical abilities with those of a mook? Even if the powers don't give them away, I don't think I should give out excessive hints until that first round of combat.

 

[SteveC]

And I couldn't disagree with this more... Daily's aren't something PCs should use lightly. if the battle is tough, or they are losing, THEN they should use their daily's... They should save it up for when they need it, not just because a DM told them they were only facing minions.

In one of the WoTC blogs one of the writers comes right out and says a great way to make a tense encounter is to send a group of zombie minions against the PC, but have an actual zombie boss as one of the members of the encounter. I suppose saying "You see 6 zombie minions with one zombie lord pretending to be a minion" might work for some people, but I find it unacceptable.

I suppose it comes down to how gamist of a game you want to run. Personally, I prefer mine to be more RP heavy, with players making their own choices. Not everyone shares that view.

I just wanted to point out that I don't consider this issue to be one of "gamism," it's more an issue of having a fun combat encounter. Our characters from novels and film know as much or as little about their opponents as the author lets them, and they don't make mistakes about who is who in combat on that level (unless the genre is comedy).

I do think it's fair game to misrepresent the opposition as weaker than thought, since that's all part of misdirection: heroes are frequently surprised with how tough their opponents are, but seldom comment on them being far weaker than they anticipated. So a fighter might use their cleave ability to chop into a group of zombies, only to find that one of them is still standing, but I wouldn't want them to waste their daily "maximumus strikus" on one. Can anyone think of a source where something like that actually happens?

Managing resources of encounter and daily powers is something that makes D&D different from a novel and a movie, so it makes sense (to me anyway) to treat encounters a little different when those powers are involved.

--Steve

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Some clues are ok i think... but telling them exactly who is a minion seems inaproriate...

actually i haven´t told my palers that minions exist at all... maybe they have guessed, because i never asked them to roll damage... maybe they think right now that every goblin has 1 or 2 hp only...

 

[Jhaelen]

I don't tell the players outright what type or kind of enemies they're facing unless it's totally obvious (e.g. everyone knows what an orc looks like), so I sure as hell won't point out if some of them are minions or not.

However, from my descriptions it should typically be quite easy to figure it out, unless they're all minions or the more powerful enemies are actively trying to hide in the crowd.

 

[Mirtek]

As a player I don't want to know who is the minion, the normal, the elite. I will figure it out the hard way (or the soft way when my 3[W] daily pulverizes a minion)

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

In my game it will be easy to identify them. They will be wearing red shirts.

Amen.

In all seriousness, I don't want players -- or PCs -- to know at first glance, because I don't want them to just ignore part of the encounter. But I'd probably put a clue or two into descriptions, and allow Perception checks to notice that some opponents are weaker/less skilled/less committed than others, and are likely minions.

Besides, telling them the opponent is a minion steals from them the joy of rolling damage. Even if an opponent only has one hit point, a player deserves to roll the fistfulls of dice from a well-earned hit.

 

[Novem5er]

I think during the first couple sessions, I'll give strong clues about who are minions or not. Why? Because in MANY of the playtests we've seen, a new players totally wastes their /encounter or even their /day power on a minion. How do you think this new player is going to feel about 4e when they think they just got "tricked" into wasting one of the things that's supposed to make 4e cool? Heck, new players who don't read these board may not even KNOW minions exist.

Imagine a new player's excitement when they first use their X power. "YES, 17 damage and everyone gets a bonus to hit him, etc, etc," .... DM: "Uh, okay... he had 3 hp. Next?"

So, at first, when players want to use an awesome power on a minion, I'll probably say something like "Face to face, this guy looks pretty weak. You think you could take him out with a single swing."

Once they realize that minions exist and how frequent they appear, then I'll stop dropping clues. The LAST thing I want is for my players to be minion-paranoid:

DM: Okay, you just got hit for 5 damage. Again. You only have 5 HP left. What are you going to do?

Player: Basic attack.

DM: Really? This guy's pretty beefy and he's been kicking your rear for 2 rounds...

Player: Oh, no! I'm not falling for that again. I missed him last round, so I still don't know if this guy's a minion. I'm not wasting a power on him. Basic Attack! Die, minion scum!

DM: *sigh*