Why I think you should try 4e (renamed)

[AllisterH]

The anti-minion argument always puzzles me, considering 4e isn't the first RPG to use that concept.

*LOL* Not a valid argument I'm afraid.

4e is the first D&D rpg that formally uses the minion concept. What the recent thread has been about is that the only reason 4e has that is because of its scaling issue

(of course, this ignores that 1, 2 and 3HD critters in previous editions make very poor minions as thanks to not factoring in gear, non-magical armour hits 0 which means those selfsame monsters can't act as minions)

 

[ExploderWizard]

Is that Assault on the Aerie of the Slave Lords? It's a good one... but an outlier. It begins with a fiat capture of the PC's, and, more importantly, it contains magic items for them to find/win as they go through it. It rapidly conforms to the expectations that I claim are present.

Actually Assault on the Aerie of the Slavelords is A3. The Pc's are equipped as normal in that module. The DM fiat capture takes place at the very end of that module.

A4-In the Dungeons of the Slavelords begins with the PC's stripped of gear and in timed event to escape before the volcano erupts.

Since I am home now, I can flip through my copy and see what wonderful magical gear the PC's have the opportunity to get before confronting the Slavelords themselves.

They start out with a few MU and ILL spell scrolls as a gift from a friend.

A giant ants lair can provide potions of extra healing and delusion.

If the PC's take time to obliterate a tribe of mycanids they may win potions of extra healing, growth, healing, invisibility, speed, and water breathing.

A squad of looters on the island can provide some mundane weapons and armor.

The PC's meet thier mysterious benefactor near the docks and he gives them a cleric scroll: cure serious wounds, cure light wounds x3, and a magic user scroll : sleep, invisibility, strength, dispel magic, hold person.

Thats it. The Slavelords boat has the PC's equipment and other goodies besides but they must be won.

There are no creatures requiring magic to hit, and the majority of the adventure must be completed without gear of any kind mundane or magical.

Ok, I'll ask again to the 1e/2e fans.

What then is your explanation for the table in the fighter's followers which clearly shows an increasing level of magic items for each more powerful level of follower?

How is that NOT an indication you were supposed to get more and more powerful magic items as you level?

Like everything else it was a guideline. That equipment listing was a suggested typical assortment. Depending on how tough the campaign was, allowing PC's to have magical gear on par with those values wasn't exactly game breaking.

Remember that gear was almost as easily destroyed as it was easy to acquire. Pc's were constantly losing items to failed saves and getting new stuff. If you were fortunate enough to have spare magical gear it was given to trusted henchmen rather than dumped at the local magical dime store.

Most monsters of the Pc's power level could be handled by a group of players without much magic gear. Gear made things a bit easier and were not required for the PC's to have a chance to hit a monster based solely on it's level.

 

[Ariosto]

Not every idea is a good one just because someone had it before. Not every good idea in one context is good in another. Not every instance of a good idea is a good implementation.

<insert Homer Simpson montage>

 

[AngryMojo]

4e is the first D&D rpg that formally uses the minion concept. What the recent thread has been about is that the only reason 4e has that is because of its scaling issue

It's really not. Several games prior to 4e have used the idea of a horde of monsters using abbreviated mechanics to speed up bookkeeping. Feng Shui and Savage Worlds come to mind. And the idea works in both.

 

[AllisterH]

It's really not. Several games prior to 4e have used the idea of a horde of monsters using abbreviated mechanics to speed up bookkeeping. Feng Shui, Savage Worlds and Mutants and Masterminds all come to mind. And the idea works in all three games.

Keep in mind I said "D&D".

I personally think D&D should have minions as frankly, the type of thing D&D is supposedly based on (Conan, LotR, Kung-fu) is rife with them. Some people believe this isn't what D&D should have, others have problems based on the actual mechanical way 4e used.

re: Guidelines

Ok, this feels like wishy-washy speak Exploderwizard. Not attacking you personally, but the more I read the pre 3e rulebooks, the more I get the sense that the earlier authors had no overall design goal.

If magic items are not "that useful" can you explain why so many modules were littered with them? At the end of the ToEE for example, multiple people are rocking an AC lower than -5.

So let's see....if you go by what the modules state, you certainly will have an AC lower than 0 (again, AC 0 was all mundane - what happened if the player had gotten lucky and rolled a 17 DEX?)

The followers certainly will be near or just below 0 (Ariosto, there's a big difference between leather +1 and plate mail +1 so just saying , "oh it's only armour + 1 doesn't help).

Yet 1hd-3hd would make good minions in previous editions? Not seeing it personally...

Exploderwizard et al - what do you consider "standard gear" for say PCs at levels 3, 6 and 9 in AD&D (or is the term standard gear only applicable to post 2e D&D?)

 

[ExploderWizard]

Keep in mind I said "D&D".

I personally think D&D should have minions as frankly, the type of thing D&D is supposedly based on (Conan, LotR, Kung-fu) is rife with them. Some people believe this isn't what D&D should have, others have problems based on the actual mechanical way 4e used.

re: Guidelines

Ok, this feels like wishy-washy speak Exploderwizard. Not attacking you personally, but the more I read the pre 3e rulebooks, the more I get the sense that the earlier authors had no overall design goal.

If magic items are not "that useful" can you explain why so many modules were littered with them? At the end of the ToEE for example, multiple people are rocking an AC lower than -5.

So let's see....if you go by what the modules state, you certainly will have an AC lower than 0 (again, AC 0 was all mundane - what happened if the player had gotten lucky and rolled a 17 DEX?)

The followers certainly will be near or just below 0 (Ariosto, there's a big difference between leather +1 and plate mail +1 so just saying , "oh it's only armour + 1 doesn't help).

Yet 1hd-3hd would make good minions in previous editions? Not seeing it personally...

Exploderwizard et al - what do you consider "standard gear" for say PCs at levels 3, 6 and 9 in AD&D (or is the term standard gear only applicable to post 2e D&D?)

You really answered your own question. The whole point was that the participants decided what the standard was for thier game. This is the type of game you get when rulings rather than rules decide most of the action. A "standard" level of gear cannot be imposed on a game without intruding on the desires of those playing.

As far as personal preferences go I prefer to play and run games with less reliance on magical gear. A -5 or lower AC by 8th level is a bit overpowered for my tastes but others may enjoy turning the magic amp up to 11. I don't feel there is anything inherently wrong with such a game but I have already been there and done that-a lot, and power playing no longer provides the joy it did at one time.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Ok, I'll ask again to the 1e/2e fans.

What then is your explanation for the table in the fighter's followers which clearly shows an increasing level of magic items for each more powerful level of follower?

How is that NOT an indication you were supposed to get more and more powerful magic items as you level?

Nobody has denied that. But the crucial differences from 3E are that a) it isn't assumed you get the optimal items that you want, and b) AC SCALES MUCH MORE SLOWLY. AC might improve by about two points between levels 1 and 8; monsters that used to hit you on a 16 now need an 18.

In 3E, the default NPC fighter had an AC gain of about 1 per level, and an optimized PC fighter might gain more like 1.5 AC per level. In prior editions, "normal" was maybe 0.25 points per level, with a lucky fighter gaining 0.5 points per level (+2 plate and +2 shield by 9th if your DM is kind).

The more rapid rise in AC means that monsters in 3E have a very narrow window of viability, as has been said.

And I'm not sure why you portray AC 0 as some mythical benchmark that makes PCs invulnerable even for 3-HD foes. A bugbear hits AC 0 on a 16 in BECMI. A hobgoblin hits it on an 18, which is 15% of the time or three times as common as "only on a 20." So it's some protection, but not absolute. Did 1E have the modifiers for attacking from the rear or higher ground and so on? That would make that AC 0 a lot less than impervious.

 

[Ariosto]

Leather +1? Yeah, that (and even "studded" leather +1) got added in AD&D ... which seems to me sort of silly if I bother to think about it. Before then, magic armor was assumed to start with the same AC as plate (which is what all those followers have).

Note that the leather types combined come up less than 1/4 as often as the suits of enchanted metal armor. Is it so surprising that the sneaky thief types end up with the leather, not the fighters -- who are better off with non-magical mail? Plate is by far the most common magic armor, accounting for fully 1/3 of all suits. It's also the only kind that goes up to +5: 2% (one being "of etherealness"), and a 1% chance of shield +5.

"AC 0 was all mundane"?? One could get AC 2 without a shield if "field plate" were available. Plus a shield would would be AC1. I'm not sure what you're referring to here, unless it's even fancier armor from Unearthed Arcana or 2E or something.

"Yet 1hd-3hd would make good minions in previous editions?" Uh, no. They would make just what they were: creatures so much tougher than normal men as not to be subject to one attack per fighter level (although high-level fighters got 3/2 or even 2 per round anyway).

 

[BryonD]

The anti-minion argument always puzzles me, considering 4e isn't the first RPG to use that concept.

Are we to conclude that you like everything that has ever been in any previous RPG?

 

[Ariosto]

If you have come across 20 caches (which usually means worn panoplies, at least in my campaign) of magical armor and/or shield, you have about 1/3 chance of having come across +5 armor and about 1/5 of +5 shield -- or 1/15 of the jackpot combo. Again, that's if you've been in on 20 such scores.

Besides that rarity, there is a very simple reason that higher-level people tend to have more and better magical goodies. To have is not to hold. The weaker you are, the more likely it is that someone (or something) stronger will come along and take your stuff.