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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Switchback" data-source="post: 4383934" data-attributes="member: 69793">Obviously the rules are in question. Especially if another dev suggested the opposite of what Mearls said. Yes they do.If you want to break the discussion down only to that, then rolling for the name of the creature with the DC monster check is obviously going to reveal them point black. Monsters names are clearly labeled, they are not 'tags', are not in parenthesis or any other sub-line to indicate their full name would not be revealed. Consult Page 4 of the Monster Manual for absolute clarity on Monster Names. A Wyrmpriests name is not 'Kobold' it is Kobold Wyrmpriest. Likewise, Kobold Minion, Kobold Skishmisher, etc. The MM does not leave any doubt.Roles are very important in 4e, they are one of the foundations of the whole combat system. To not give the player's monster names is about as silly as pretending the monsters cannot tell the humans apart, as to which is the fighter, wizard, or paladin. By its weapons, armor, other equipment, or even their condition. By its clothes, ornaments, physical appearance. By whether it is giving orders or taking them. By its disposition (scared, confident, shaky, etc). There are any number of ways which identifying can make combat more interesting in fun. "The 6 Kobolds near the cliff look runty and hesitant, and are carrying rust marked spears." In other cases, it might not be worth the bother and simply let the players roll and say, "Those 6 are Kobold Minions."Sure. That's fine. If it happens every encounter I would find it awfully lame though. The impression I get from the Minion concept is that they are the lowest, weakest, shock troops of a type, and you are supposed to in general be able to recognize that without massive subterfuge on the part of the DM to hide it. I agree with you there actually, notwithstanding the clarity of the name issue. Posting back and forth endless rules minutia interpretation to prove one is 'right' is not usually productive. I wanted to broaden the discussion for those like the OP, so they can see the implications behind a mechanic that is really no more than trying to trick the players into not knowing close to the real value of the threats they might be facing. Which would be a vast departure from previous editions of the game - at least where common critters are concerned.</blockquote>

Verification