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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="muffin_of_chaos" data-source="post: 4213537" data-attributes="member: 65007">It would seem that they don't, by WotC's definition.  The point of minions is to create a class of faceless, nameless orcs that Legolas can kill instantly because he's Legolas and they are orcs, but they can still hurt Legolas if they get too close, rather than just auto-miss.  It isn't particularly realistic, but it doesn't have to be.I don't appreciate the fact that two-weapon fighting isn't seem to be available without using powers...of course, we don't know that that's true.  It's an assumption.This is definitely a opinion thing that can't be argued with.  I don't know what all monsters are in the MM, so I don't know if I approve.  However, I'm gonna go ahead and guess that the designers weren't thinking "let's just throw some random monsters in there, for the heck of it."  Every edition has opted for different monsters in the core monster manual, and each time there was a reason.'Cuz it isn't what Wizards are meant to do in a setting chock-full of magic.  I approve of Gandalf, the dude who was full a Wizard and acted more like a Fighter or Cleric; but the setting was filled with passive magic, not active.  The Vancian magic system was incredibly silly, and this is better--especially for settings that have lots of magic--even if it has its problems.Personal preference.  I feel that good, "realistic" effects of illusions would require intensive collaboration between player and DM, which toes the line between who is and isn't in control.If you don't like it, you can always change the point-buy method or make it 4d6 drop highest or whatever you want.  This way WotC can emphasize more than one ability score, which adds to the character of races and makes me happy.Sorry that upsets you.</blockquote>

Verification