D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Hussar]

Huh? Do you recall what you wrote upthread (about minions being "immortal, never need to eat or sleep, and utterly immune to diseases")? Look at the sentence structure and see where the non-exclusivity applies. It doesn't change that a minion is destroyed when it takes any amount of damage: that remains true. Rather it allows that in addition to that a minion might be killed in other ways such as without taking damage.


That's a peculiar and mistaken reading. The "when" applies to the "any amount of damage=destroyed" condition=effect pairing. And it's non-exclusivity has nothing to do with the meaning of the word "destroyed". It simply allows other, different pairings to also apply (or at least, doesn't rule them out from applying).

Were there a disease for instance that killed creatures without damaging them such that "diseased=killed" then that isn't ruled out just because "any amount of damage=destroyed". Both can be true.

By your interpretation, it is impossible for minions to be killed. Because if they can be killed, then they can be incapacitated. But, by your definition, they cannot be incapacitated, therefore they cannot be killed, only destroyed.

And apparently, this was all resolved a short time later with the Rules Companion which supersedes the original books. So, it looks like your interpretation was wrong all the way along.

 

[clearstream]

From the Rules Compendium:
View attachment 415998
Checking the RC, I noticed the Minion rules say nothing about being defeated, destroyed or killed, just the following:
View attachment 415999

@FrogReaver here is the game text from the 4e Rules Compendium Glossary

minion [role]: A minion is destroyed when it takes any damage. If a minion is missed by an attack that deals damage on a miss, the minion doesn’t take that damage.​

​

Emphasis mine.

 

[Hussar]

I read it instead as abstract game-state: leaving up to players to create the story just as you say.

No. You do not. Because the players cannot create a story. They MUST destroy a minion. Full stop. They are bound by a single narrative that your exclusive interpretation (which has later been proven to be wrong) enforces on the game.

 

[clearstream]

No. You do not. Because the players cannot create a story. They MUST destroy a minion. Full stop. They are bound by a single narrative that your exclusive interpretation (which has later been proven to be wrong) enforces on the game.

Dealing any damage to a minion moves the game system to the state where that minion is destroyed (just as sunlight for a vampire can move the game system to the state that it is destroyed.) Players narrate from there.

It's very common in TTRPG for game systems to move to a state and players to pick it up from there.

 

[clearstream]

By your interpretation, it is impossible for minions to be killed. Because if they can be killed, then they can be incapacitated. But, by your definition, they cannot be incapacitated, therefore they cannot be killed, only destroyed.

That's mistaken.

"A minion is destroyed when it takes any damage" RC page 313​

given the condition of taking some amount of damage is true​

then the minion is destroyed​

​

That doesn't rule out other possibilities: it only says what happens given that one condition. A different condition, such as the casting of a sleep spell, could incapacitate a minion.

And apparently, this was all resolved a short time later with the Rules Companion which supersedes the original books. So, it looks like your interpretation was wrong all the way along.

That's mistaken as I have just posted upthread.

 

[Hussar]

From the Rules Compendium

Can we put this to rest now? It's right there that you can knock a minion unconcious.

 

[clearstream]

From the Rules Compendium

View attachment 416016

Can we put this to rest now? It's right there that you can knock a minion unconcious.

Well spotted. It seems utterly perverse to me that they repeatedly state that minions are destroyed by any amount of damage in three different books (including the RC), only to define in this one place that they may not be.

What's next?

 

[Pedantic]

Well spotted. It seems utterly perverse to me that they repeatedly state that minions are destroyed by any amount of damage in three different books (including the RC), only to define in this one place that they may not be.

What's next?

This seems like a pretty standard 4eism to me, and a general extension of the idea that monster and NPC stats exist entirely to govern their interaction with PCs during combat. The game simply doesn't believe it's any concern of the rules precisely how you define the "no longer relevant to combat" state. Calling that "destroyed" or "unconscious" or "killed" is pretty irrelevant to the primary purpose of the mechanics, and thus isn't a place where any precision was used.

 

[loverdrive]

Are we seriously discussing the narrative implications of using "destroy" to mean "remove from play"?

Am I understanding this correctly?

 

[Hussar]

Well spotted. It seems utterly perverse to me that they repeatedly state that minions are destroyed by any amount of damage in three different books (including the RC), only to define in this one place that they may not be.

What's next?

Probably because they didn't think that anyone would ever define destroyed in such a way to preclude killed or unalived.

I mean, I played 4e for quite a while, and have followed the rules discussions for years. This was the first time I'd ever seen anyone try this particular interpretation. I do have to thank you for one of the most bizarre rules discussions I've had in quite some time. And given this thread, that's saying quite a lot.