Over the past couple seasons of D&D Encounters I’ve had the opportunity to play with a lot of new players. Many of these players (usually the younger ones) were competently new to D&D or any RPG fro that matter. While some of the DMs have found it frustrating to run tables with so many inexperienced players, I’ve found it to be quite rewarding.

During this time I’ve come up some guidelines for running games with new players. Although I put these together to help me manage tables of newbies, many of these points are still good to keep in mind when running any table, no matter how much experience your players have.

Keep It Simple

The most important thing to remember when you’ve got new players at the table is to keep it simple. There are a lot of rules in D&D and throwing everything at them all at once can be overwhelming.

Simplicity begins with the character sheet. If they’re making their own character, than encourage them to play a simple class, one with no moving parts. D&D Essentials classes are built this way. They use their basic attacks eliminating the choices of which At-Will power to use on your turn. Characters that have to apply conditional damage (Rogue sneak dice, Ranger’s Hunter’s Quarry) will add additional steps that are not necessary early on. There’s a reason most people begin by playing a Fighter – they’re easy to work. You just focus on one monster and keep it pinned down until it’s dead.

Bend Some Rules, Break Others

During combat I don’t try to explain the standard, move, minor concepts initially. I just ask the player if they want to engage a monster (attack) and if they want to move. When a new player is still learning I rarely have monsters make opportunity attacks. Since the simplest classes don’t usually have powers they can use as a minor action I don’t confuse them by bringing it up. If they’re running one of the pre-gens then I usually have a pretty good idea of what powers are available to them so I can make suggestions or recommendations.

For example we’ve had a new player running Fargrim, the Dwarven Fighter (Slayer) over the past few sessions of D&D Encounters. Fargrim has two stances that he can activate as a minor action. The player is younger and still trying to grasp all the rules so I just apply the stance’s applicable modifiers in my head rather than insist he declare that he’s activating them. As his comfort level grows I’ll explain all the nuances of how the stances work and that he needs to decide when to active each one, but for now I’m willing to let him pick a monster, charge in, and hit it with his weapon.

Encourage and Reward Role-Playing

D&D is about more than just killing monsters. Newer players (especially younger ones) are drawn to the game initially because they get to kill stuff. But I believe that it’s my job as their DM to remind them that it’s a role-playing game and that they’re actually playing a character.

If combat is what they’re most interested in, then I try to get them to role-playing the fighting. It’s not just roll a d20 and tell me if you hit, it’s tell me what weapon you’re using, what power, and how it looks before rolling any dice. Once we determine if you hit or miss, tell me how your character reacts.

When the players take the time and effort to describe their actions, the characters they play begin to take on personalities. This personality, although initially developed during combat, will then carryover into non-combat situations. The ranged attacker that hides in the back and shoots monsters from a safe distance may be played as a cautious coward or a smart tactician. The melee combatant that hit a lot may be played as overconfident and arrogant, or just really lucky and quite humble.

As players get more and more into their characters I’m a lot more inclined to say yes to creative ideas. I’m also more inclined to give them a +1 bump if the description of what they’re doing is really good. As players catch on to this it encourages even more excellent role-playing. Now I have players jumping and leaping, spinning as they make attacks, calling out inspiring battle cries, taunting monsters, and attacks that target specific areas of the monster’s body. Believe me, it’s a lot more exciting than just rolling a d20 to hit.

Skill Challenges Are Challenging

Considering how many experienced players still have trouble understanding the skill challenge mechanics it’s not surprising that it completely baffles newer players. I’ve learned that it’s a huge mistake to announce that the party is engaging in a skill challenge. I let the storytelling and character interactions happen fluidly. The players always want to roll dice and think that they need to do so after every action, no matter what it is. When there is a puzzle of obvious challenge put in front of them they immediately look to their character sheet and try to find the skill with the highest modifier. I try to discourage this approach. Skill challenges are not combat.

When we’re in an actual skill challenge I ask everyone to put down their dice and look at the people around the table, not their character sheets. I try to get them to converse in character like they would a in a real life situation – look at the people you’re talking to. After describing the scene I ask them what they think they can do to help the situation or overcome the obstacle (without looking at their character sheets). I encourage common sense and not mechanics. And I remind them that in most cases any rolls that they may be required to make will be easily attainable.

One thing that I never allow is for a player to just declare that they’re using a skill and then rolling a d20. They have to tell me what they’re doing and then how they think that skill will help them accomplish that takes. Sometimes it’s obvious “I’m using Athletics to climb this wall,” but I still make them tell me what they’re doing. I try to encourage players to think about actions before mechanics and not the other way around. If they think they have to use Nature because it’s their best skill then it will limit their creativity. If they have to decide on an action first they’ll think outside of the box and may end up trying something that uses a skill they didn’t expect to use (usually because it’s not their best skill). However, talking it out before rolling any dice allows other players to explain how they can help (assist) and it allows for a character with a better base score to make the primary check, thereby increasing the likelihood of success.

Above All Else, Have Fun

Having fun might seem like an obvious expectation, but I’m amazed at how many DMs and players forget that it’s just a game. Sure D&D is more complex than Monopoly, but it’s still just a game. And the reason we play games is to have fun. A good DM will gauge the table’s enthusiasm and adjust accordingly. If a group is having a hard time with an encounter, try to throw the party a bone to keep spirit’s up. It may seem like a small thing but it really works.

For example, in real-life after a natural disaster rescue crews will use dogs to help find survivors. If the dog hasn’t found any living survivors by the end of the day the handler will stage a rescue so that the dog gets the satisfaction of having found at least one survivor. Help your players by doing the same. If they’re getting destroyed during a tough combat session give them a spectacular kill right at the end or reward them with some unexpected treasure that way they feel like their sacrifice was worth it.

These are the most common things I try to keep in mind and apply to my games when I’m running with newer players. This is by no means an exhaustive list, but it should help DMs running tables with new players. What other tips or suggestions do you have for DMs in similar situations? Perhaps there are certain things that you would recommend DMs avoid doing? Please share your experiences and thoughts when it comes to running a game with new players.

Related reading:

• More Confessions of a D&D Camp Councilor
• A Beginner’s Guide To Dungeons & Dragons (Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3)
• 10 Reminders for All D&D Players

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

In Dungeons & Dragons, as in real life, there are two things that help people succeed where others fail: what you’ve done and who you know. In D&D we already make a big deal about “what you’ve done” and we call it XP, but there never seems to be much emphasis or importance placed on “who you know.”

Who you know can be interpreted in a few different ways, but when I think of this idea I think of all the people you can call on or a favour. This favour might be something as simple as a piece of local gossip or as significant as borrowing the King’s royal scepter. The point is that who you know is an important part of character development. During a PCs adventuring career he will meet many people and I’ll bet that many of them would be willing to help him down the road if the circumstances are right.

However so few players bother to track these potential allies and fewer still ever make an effort to call upon them when they need something. It’s impossible for an adventurer to do everything himself, that’s why he’s part of an adventuring party. But even his four or five closest buddies won’t always have what he needs. This is where contact can become exceptionally useful.

Building Up Your Contact List

Initially most PCs are inexperienced and haven’t really done much. At the beginning they’ll likely rely on “who they know” more than “what they’ve done.” I like to encourage players to include at least one important NPC that figures prominently in the PCs life before he was an adventurer. It can be a parent, sibling, employer, teacher or even a rival adventurer. The point is that this person can help the PCs or provide guidance early in their adventuring careers.

As the PCs earn XP and explore the world around them I introduce new NPCs that they can add to their contact list. I try to give all PCs the opportunity to add one solid contact to their list at every level. Some NPCs may end up being a contact for more than one PC and that’s fine. However, if the players like the idea of have a few unique contacts at their disposal then I encourage them to tell me what kind of NPCs the want to foster relationships with moving forward.

Often the contacts will be closely tied to a PC’s class or goals. A Rogue might want to reach out to the local thieves’ guild or fence, the Paladin may want to contact the local church of an affiliated deity or try to get in good with local law enforcement. In some cases the NPCs begin as just a part of the story and aren’t exceptional in any way. If a PC takes interest in the NPC then I’ll flesh them out a bit and see how they might be able to assist the PCs down the road.

Not all contacts will help the PCs for free. In some cases a price must be paid. It may be an exchange of information or it may be actual hard currency. It all depends on the NPC, the significance of the favour and the impact it will have on the adventure or ongoing story. In order to keep things balanced, I usually say that most contacts are merely good sources of information. It reminds the players that the contact provide a small bonus, not a free pass.

Location

In addition to recording the contact’s name it’s a good idea to record where they are usually found. If the campaign involves a lot of travelling then the PCs may end up with contacts all over the place. This means that they will have fewer contacts to turn to depending on where they are. In these kinds of games I like to have some of the contacts be fellow travelers. Examples include traveling merchants, wandering minstrels, swords for hire, and ship captains. This gives me as the DM a way to include some of the contacts without things seeming too far fetched or coincidental.

If the campaign if centralized, in a large city for example, then most of the contact will likely be available all the time. In these cases I try to upgrade contacts frequently. The rookie constable that they met at level 1 is replaced by a lieutenant who has access to better information. The thief disguised as a beggar might get thrown in prison and the PC makes a new contact while visiting his friend.

Earning a Favour

In our article Adding Favours to Treasure Bundles we suggested that not every reward needs to be tangible. As a DM I often award favours to the PCs and I think more DM should adopt this practice. It’s a good way to develop the larger story arc by making NPCs memorable. If a ship captain owes the party a favour you know that they’ll make a point of remember his name, his ship’s name, the names of his officers and their usual ports of call. It’s also likely that the PCs will make a point of looking for this captain whenever they reach a port city. They may not need to travel by ship, but if they know he’s around they suddenly have options that they wouldn’t otherwise have if things go badly.

A person who owes the PCs a favour will take a place on his contact list but once the favour’s repaid the PCs won’t be able to count on him to help them next time. The up side is that the favour is usually performed free of change since it did take the place of a treasure bundle so most players are ok with loosing that contact once the favour is provided.

Streetwise

Once contact and favours become a regular part of your game players may opt to train Streetwise. This is a good idea as it will make finding new contacts that much easier. However, players that aren’t trained in the social skills and have a low Charisma shouldn’t be penalized. I see Streetwise as a way to open doors that wouldn’t otherwise be available. A regular PC may be able to make contact with a prison guard, possibly even one with some pull; a PC with s decent Streetwise check may be able to make contact with the Warden. Both contacts are useful, but the Warden obviously has more pull than the head screw.

Tips When Using Contacts

Using contact can be a good way to encourage role-playing and character development, especially in a party that’s used to hack and slash. It’s not going to excite all players equally so be mindful of that when providing new contacts. Don’t let the one player who’s really into using his contact hog the spotlight too often. When the PCs do use their contacts make sure they realize that whatever they gain from doing so is a reward for their diligence. If they’d not fostered this relationship then this information or service might not have been available at all.

Do your players keep track of important NPCs that they might be able to call upon for favours or information? Do you ever award favours in place of treasure bundles? How do players react when they receive the promise of a favour?

Related reading:

• Adding Favours to Treasure Bundles
• Skill Focus: Streetwise
• Benefits to Adventuring in the City

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

Everyday as I venture to work in downtown Toronto I make use of the PATH. The PATH is Toronto’s underground labyrinth of shops and corridors connecting office buildings, shopping centers and public transit together. In the summer it provides escape from the sunny surface streets and in the winter it is a much warmer alternative than walking through snow. Wandering the PATH is the closest I’ll ever come to exploring a real dungeon and it’s a great example of a fantastic location that can inspire any DM.

This month Keith Davies – In My Campaign hosts the RPG Blog Carnival. January’s topic is Fantastic Locations. In the Dungeons Master contribution to the blog carnival we’ll begin by taking you through the PATH before emerging to street level and exploring how to transform a regular location into something fantastic for your next campaign.

The PATH connects where people live with where people work. It also provides underground access to amenities like grocery stores, medical offices, university and colleges, fitness clubs, and even city hall. There are numerous pubs, restaurants and fast food establishments beneath the bustling streets of Toronto’s downtown core. Movie theaters, performance centers, and professional sports arenas are also connected to the PATH. It has everything you need and it’s all connected underground. Many people go for days or longer without going outside. The PATH makes it possible to live a subterranean lifestyle.

I find that wandering the PATH is an inexhaustible source of inspiration for my next D&D campaign. There are so many interconnected passages that lead to so many different areas of downtown Toronto that each journey is different. There always seems to be new shops springing up so even a familiar route is often transformed.

Wandering the PATH can be daunting and overwhelming at first. Numerous maps are posted periodically and direction markers indicate where you’re heading as you go from one building to the next. The area beneath each office building strives to create its own identity to better establish itself among the hundreds of shops and eateries. For example, the floors, walls and ceilings in one of the bank building are all a rust-red colour giving it a unique an unmistakable look.

The PATH as a whole can give DMs plenty of inspiration for subterranean campaigns, but focusing on any one building can be just as rewarding. For example, my office is one of four buildings that surround an enclosed concrete courtyard. Although the courtyard is not part of the PATH system because it’s above ground, I’ve often imagined how it can become a fantastic location for a large-scale combat after the party finally emerges from the underground PATH itself.

Below are numerous photos of the courtyard. I look out my office window and stare down on this scene every day. As I’ve stared out at this location day after day I’ve often imagined how it could become the perfect location for my next D&D camping.

One thing that makes converting this real life location into something more suitable for D&D is that the ground is already divided into 5ft x 5ft squares. In your campaign you can have the large fountain in the middle of the courtyard be a calm pool or the home to a raging water elemental. Maybe you’d prefer that it be full of bubbling lava? The benches and flowerbeds are easily converted to difficult or blocking terrain. Is the restaurant a pub that welcomes all thirsty travelers or is it abandoned and haunted? How would you use the elephant statue? Is it just a statue or does it animate? Maybe it’s a golem waiting to attack unsuspecting PCs? Instead of an elephant perhaps it’s a small dragon? Use the courtyard as one massive area or just use bits and pieces as necessary for your adventure.

If you keep your eyes open and take in your surroundings you can find plenty of inspiration for the terrain of your next encounter. Look past the familiar or the obvious and put on your gamers goggles. See even the most familiar places as more than they are in real life and transform them into the next fantastic location that you send the PCs in your campaign.

How often have you used familiar, real life location as the basis for battle maps in your campaign? Did the players catch on or did you disguise it well enough to keep them guessing?

Check out the PATH:

• City of Toronto Website – PATH
• PATH – Toronto’s Downtown Walkway (PDF)
• Commerce Court

Commerce Court Photo Gallery

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

I’ve played in a lot of games where things could have been a lot easier if we’d only had a Cleric in the party. Or an archer. Or someone trained in Thievery. Or a controller. The point is that some obstacles are going to be easier if you have the right tools for the job. This is also true when it comes to PCs. The right mix of classes and races in any given party will provide you with a competitive edge that will make many tasks easier.

Many DMs design adventures knowing what tools, skills and abilities the PCs have and create challenges that their unique skill sets will be adequately suited to overcome. However, there are often just as many times where the DM simply needs to throw certain monsters or other obstacles at the PCs and if they don’t have the right tools for the job then things are going to be a lot more difficult. This is especially true of you are playing form a printed adventure like those found in Dungeon magazine. The key to overcoming this issue is to try to ensure that the party is made up of the PCs most suited for the job in front of them; a task that’s easier said than done.

Most gamers I know have multiple characters. In fact, each member of my gaming group has a character tree. This is a concept that we first learned of playing in the original Dark Sun campaign setting. The idea is that Dark Sun is such a cruel and unforgiving world that PCs will die… often. Getting each player to create multiple PCs – the character tree – ensures that there is a suitable back-up character waiting in the wings in the event that the primary character is killed. We didn’t adopt the character tree idea because our characters are killed with any regularity; rather as new books were released we wanted to try out the new classes and races without leaving the established story and in-game history. In order to keep things balanced all characters in the character tree are exactly the same level. This way a player who always uses the same PC doesn’t end up with a character many levels above the party’s average level while his back-up characters are all still only level 1.

Assuming there is opportunity to swap PCs, and assuming your DM deems it appropriate given the situation, it is possible to have the right tools (or in this case the right PC) for every adventure. However, a lot of players don’t think that far ahead. They have it in their mind that they’re going to play a certain PC and that’s the end of the discussion. But what if you didn’t have final say on which of your characters you were going to use for the next adventure? What if someone else in your gaming group was given the opportunity to tell everyone else what character to play? How might this improve the chances of success?

The members of my gaming group are big believes in “play what you want” when it comes to character creation. The result is a lot of strikers and leaders, but few defenders and controllers. At the beginning of each new adventure all the players choose one PCs from their character tree. Following our “play what you want” philosophy everybody plays whichever PC they fell like running for that game. We rarely take into consideration what everyone else is playing. We’re experienced enough that we can handle missing roles or lop-sided party make-up. In fact, missing a role in the party make-up has often led to some of the most memorable adventures (but not always in a good way).

The problem that we face more often than not is that we just don’t have the right tool for the job. One player chooses his Wizard instead of his Warlord, another chose his Bard instead of his Ranger.

Over the past few years in my home game the PCs have been part of an adventuring company or part of a military unit. In these scenarios the party always has a patron or boss who assigns them missions. It provides the DM with a really easy way to get the PCs involved in whatever he’s dreamt up for the next adventure. It also serves as a good way to explain why all of the PCs, none of whom are the same race or class, have come together and stayed together.

Moving forward I’m going to suggest that out group try something a little bit different to try to ensure that we end up with the best tools for the job. Normally at the beginning of each new adventure the party’s patron brings the group together, sets the stage and sends them off to fight evil and save the world. The players choose which PC they want to use and it’s off you go. But what if the players don’t make that choice for themselves? What if the patron instead picks one PC and designates him as mission commander. The mission commander is responsibly for selecting the best party from the PCs in the character tress to accomplish the mission.

Over the next few adventures, each player takes a turn as the mission commander and they get to put together the best party. The players will still only play their own character, but they won’t be the ones choosing which one they run over the next few sessions. Some players may have some initial resistance to this kind of approach. They might have wanted to play their Sorcerer this time, but the mission commander selected their Paladin so that’s the PCs they’ll be playing. Players have to be willing to take one for the team and play the PC the mission commander thinks will work best.

In order for this kind of approach to work, the adventures need to be fairly short. Most players have multiple characters and among them there is usually a favourite. If the various mission commanders don’t let the player run his favourite PC for weeks at a time there’s likely going to be some out-of-game resentment. However, if everyone gets a turn as mission commander then you know that you’ll get to play your favourite PC at least once.

By designating one PC as mission commander it allows that character to take on some leadership responsibilities. The DM should provide some advanced details to the mission commander secretly so that he can make an informed choice of who’s going to be coming along for this mission. If the mission commander wants to gather all the PCs from “the unit” together and explains the mission the players can have the ones they feel will be most suitable speak up and request to be part of the mission. Alternatively the mission commander can simply tell each player which PC he wants them to play.

In the article Playing Someone Else’s Character we said that letting a player run someone else’s character allows them to demonstrate certain ticks, stunts or tactics that the character’s creator hadn’t considered. Letting one of the other players in your group decide which character you’re going to play has the potential to yield similar results. However, instead of highlighting one character’s potential as an individual the mission commander has a chance to highlight how certain character working together create synergies that might not have otherwise been apparent, especially if those two PCs never seemed to be in the party at the same time.

In the end it all comes down to party building. By taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture, in this case all PCs in the various character trees, each mission commander can create a tactical unit he feels is most suited for the upcoming adventure. In some cases there will be obvious choices, divine characters if there is going to be undead, sneaky characters if there’s likely to be some undercover work, or charismatic characters if it’s a social challenge. However in some cases the mission commander may not have a lot of details up front. He may only know that there is unrest in the neighbouring kingdom and has to choose the party with the most versatility. But even when details are sketchy it is still possible to assess the resources at your disposal and do whatever you can to ensure that you end up with the right tools (or PCs) for the job.

Related reading:

• The Party That Prepares Survives
• Adventuring With A Sub-Optimal Party
• Quitting the Party Mid-Adventure
• Playing In An Unbalanced Party

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

What if you never got more hit points that what you began with at level 1? Think about it. As 4e is set up now most PCs begin with around 20 hit points. This is enough to take a couple of hits but you are by no means invulnerable. As you get more XP and level up you start to improve and one thing that comes with each level bump is more hit points. But lately I’ve been wondering how things would change if your maximum hit points were fixed. How would this change D&D?

In previous editions of D&D PCs could begin with as few as 1 hit point. Some PCs were extremely fragile and a single hit from anything could, and often did, kill them. Knowing that PCs were this vulnerable forced players to play smarter. If your PC was likely to die from a single hit you didn’t run blindly into a group of monsters, even if they were only Kobolds or Goblins. Tactics were important because they often made the difference between living and dying.

As PCs level their maximum hit points increase. This has been a fundamental part of character design in every edition of D&D. But if you think about it this is actually a really silly concept. After all, an arrow to the chest or a slash from a battle axe is just as likely to kill you whether you’re level 1 or level 20. So what that you’ve been in hundreds of fights and killed countless monsters, that doesn’t make you any less vulnerable to being stabbed. What level advancement should do it give you a better understanding of tactics and let you better prepare for the next fight. It should also provide resources in the form of magic items and gold pieces in order to better equip yourself.

If maximum hit points were to remain fixed throughout the course of a PCs existence things in D&D would change.

• Initiative

Initiative would become the most important part of combat. If a single hit was all it took to kill the PCs or their opponents, then winning initiative would often mean the difference between life and death. Feats like Improved Initiative or any or power, feat or items that bumped initiative would become that much more desirable.

• Tactics

Most 4e combat has two relatively equal forces clashing and battling it out for victory. Through the course of the fight everyone takes a few hits, that’s just part of the game. And because we all know that PCs can take a few hits we often throw any advanced tactics out the window. The heroes line up on one side of the battle map and the monsters line up on the other. When the fighting starts we move in and engage. And this is fine when you’ve got hit points to spare.

But when survival means not getting hit at all you have to change the way you fight. Intelligence and tactics become paramount. Scouting and information gathering are even more important than the ability to swing a sword. If you can learn how many monsters are over the next ridge, their approximate strengths, weaknesses, and whether or not they have archers or Wizards, then you can decide if you’re going to engage or avoid them. Maybe you sneak up, shoot a few of them with arrows and then run. The point is that frontal assaults won’t work the way they do now if everyone involved is vulnerable.

I think that if hit points didn’t increase you’d see a lot more parley and a lot more stealth. Neither side of a conflict would be as willing to fight if they knew that such an engagement would result in huge causalities on both sides. In those situations where fighting did happen, I think we’d see a lot more retreating from monsters and PCs. Better to run and live than stay and die.

• Defenses

If a single jab from a spear could kill you then you’ve got to think that everyone would be wearing heavy armor and carrying big shields. The higher your defenses the less likely your opponents are to actually connect when they attack you. A high AC could mean the difference between lasting one round and lasting three.

Anything you could do during character creation to give yourself more hit points would become a serious consideration. Assuming that your Constitution (or at least you Con modifier) still affected your hit points then it’s safe to say no one would use it as the dump stat. Selecting a feats like Toughness or anything else that increased your hit points would become almost mandatory for frontline combatants.

• Weapons

Ranged weapons and weapons with reach will become a lot more desirable – anything that keeps your opponent at arm’s length and keeps you from harm is good. The other trend we’d likely see is everyone using weapons that inflict massive damage, like a great sword or craighammer. If your opponent is only going to have 10-20 hit points then you want to inflict as much damage with each hit as you can to ensure that every blow is a killing blow. Feats that improve damage output will be very desirable for the same reason. Suddenly a +1 weapon can actually make the difference between a wounding blow and a killing blow. Crits will now kill.

PCs that aren’t capable of wielding such deadly weapons may still opt to do so, forfeiting the proficiency bonus. They know that one good hit from a really big weapon will do the same job as two hit from a really small weapon, yet it won’t give your opponent a chance to stick you back between attacks. As PCs advance they’ll likely take weapon proficiency feats to offset poor attack scores.

• Legendary Monsters

In 3e and 4e D&D, DMs could scale monsters to give their party an appropriate challenge based on the party’s level. This usually meant that the monsters hit points would scale accordingly in order to challenge higher level PCs who could inflict more damage. But what if monsters – all monsters – were in the same boat as the PCs? Imagine a Dragon that has a fixed number of hit points. Whether it’s level 10 or level 20, it still has the same number of hit points. It would still be a lot of hit points, but the number wouldn’t change.

A party of PCs, regardless of level, trying to face off against a Dragon would really have to use smart tactics or get extremely lucky to beat it. After all the Dragon’s probably going to have hundreds of hit points whereas the PCs will only have 20. So even if everyone hit the Dragon in the first round, it would likely be able to kill multiple PCs before round two began. Victory against these kinds of odd is truly the thing legends are made of. If you defeat a dragon everyone will know that you are truly heroic.

A lot of RPGs use a mechanic where the PCs have but a hand full of hit points that don’t increase or don’t increase more than a few points over the character’s lifetime. Admittedly these games tend not to be populated with creatures like Beholders and Dragons, but when such powerful forces are used it’s clear that the PCs should not engage them one-on-one.

Fixing a character’s maximum hit points would really change the way a lot of people play D&D. It would also mean that a lot of people would spend a lot of time making new characters as their PCs died week after week. But as much as I enjoy playing fantasy RPGs like D&D, the fact that a high level PCs can survive multiple stab wounds and a pelting from archers stretches my disbelief a little bit too far. Weapons are deadly. A sword-wielding opponent should be scary and force PCs to consider options other than “attack” when facing this scenario.

What are your thoughts on fixed maximum hit points? Do you think that as PCs level up they should get more hit points? Do you think that an arrow should have the ability to kill, regardless of an opponent’s level? How else do you think fixed maximum hit points would change the way people play D&D?

Related reading:

• Don’t Fight to the Death
• Retreat Is Always An Option, At Least It Should Be
• Big Bad Weapons

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

Remember the old D&D Cartoon from the 80s? Six kids are magically transported into the world of Dungeons & Dragons where they fight the forces of evil while trying to find a way home. (See the cartoon intro below). In the cartoon the Dungeons Master was an actual character. He would appear at the beginning of each episode and provide the heroes with a quest; in much the same way the DM does during an actual game of D&D. The DM served as the guide for the characters in the show and the viewers at home. He’d also step in from time to time and give the characters advice or help them out of a really tight jam.

In 4e D&D the DM is not one NPC, rather the DM takes on the roles of every NPC. But wouldn’t it make things easier if Dungeon Master actually was an NPC in your game?

Using an actual NPC called Dungeon Master may be an easy way to resolve a lot of the issues or problems that sometimes arise in your game. It also gives you a way to have some direct iteration with the characters. Dungeon Master can act as a guide, providing the PCs with motivation for their next quest, much like he did in the cartoon. He can also be a good way to remind the players of details that their characters would know, especially names of people and places.

Dungeon Master can be especially helpful in a situation like D&D Encounters. We have a lot of younger players at my FLGS and they have relatively short attention spans. From week to week they often forget important details. Having Dungeon Master himself show up each week to do the recap can be a great way to get players to pay more attention, especially since they can interact with him directly. During the last season of D&D Encounters a lot of the players struggled to understand why they were taking on some tasks. Having Dungeon Master show up and emphasize their importance or providing details that were forgotten, the PCs can then make better decisions.

Whenever something in your campaign changes, say a new character joins the group or a character is absent, you can simply have Dungeon Master shows up and say “Braddoc is needed elsewhere but I leave you Delian in his stead. Good luck, brave heroes.” In cases where the DM may need to bend the rules for the greater story, he can have Dungeon Master show up and take care of it. For example, if the PCs have burned through their healing surges but it doesn’t make sense for them to rest given where they are in the story, why not have Dungeon Master show up and replenish a few surges for the party?

In extreme cases Dungeon Master can even raise character from the dead if there are no other alternatives. I’d be more inclined to believe that an omniscient Wizard called Dungeon Master showed up in our moment of peril and raised a fallen comrade than some lame excuse like he wasn’t actually dead because the last attack only grazed him.

In a recent game a few of the players were bickering over who got a particular magic item. They ended up fighting in-game and yelling out-of-game. Why not have Dungeon Master show up in-game and settle things. He comes up with a way for the PCs to best determining who gets the magic sword and if they can’t come to terms he’ll simply disenchant the item. After all he’s the Dungeon Master and can do anything.

Using such an obvious form of “Deus ex Machina” to resolve problems and convey information may seem a little bit silly or juvenile but I think it’s the kind of thing even the most serious gamers will be up for. After all, if they realize that Dungeon Master is on their side and would never do anything to intentionally harm them, why wouldn’t they welcome his assistance. It also gives DMs a license to be creative. In the cartoon Dungeon Master never actually came out and said do this or go that way; he often spoke in riddles and provided only clues. In my experience players would rather decipher these cryptic messages from Dungeon Master than just listen to a talking head DM who reads pages of text right from an adventure.

If you do decide to use Dungeon Master as an actual entity in your games you should also decide early on if he is well-known. In the cartoon many people are aware of Dungeon Master’s existence. In fact he has enemies of his own who sometimes attack the heroes just to get his attention. Although this isn’t something I’d likely do with any great regularity is does give the DM a way to introduce new and unexpected villains to the game that otherwise would have no reason to engage the PCs.

So the next time you’re unsure how to fix a problem in your campaign or remind the PCs of information vital to the upcoming session, consider having the little guy in the red robes show up and introduce himself as Dungeon Master. It will certainly make for a memorable session.

Have you ever used Dungeon Master as an actual NPC in your campaign? How did the players and PCs react? Was anyone ever dumb enough to try to kill Dungeon Master? How often did you have Dungeon Master appear and did you place any limits on his power? If this isn’t something you’ve ever done is it something you’d consider? How do you think your group would react?

Related reading:

• The DM’s PC – Something Between a PC and an NPC
• Why Are We Doing This?
• Campaign Design: Fleshing Out Your NPCs

D&D Cartoon Intro

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

The lightning rail changed the way people and good were transported across the Five Nations. It’s become such an important and integral means of cheap and reliable transportation across Khorvaire that it would be hard to image life without it.

House Orien takes great steps to ensure that the trains run on time. They work with House Cannith engineers to keep the mechanics and magic in check, and they employ House Deneith Marshals to maintain order onboard the vehicles. All aspects of running the lighting rail happen so efficiently that most people forget all the work that goes into keeping the train running on time – and that’s just the way House Orien wants it.

The last thing House Orien wants is negative publicity. Although the lightning rail is one of the safest means of travel there are occasional problems. However, when issues arise they are dealt with quickly and quietly.

The Desperadoes

The Desperadoes (as they’ve been dubbed by the Sentinel Marshals) are a group of train robbers that have plagued House Orien and the lightning rail for over a year. They specialize in robbing moving trains – getting on and off before anyone realizes what’s happened. The Desperadoes have successfully robbed over 20 trains in the past year and so far no one has yet been caught or charged for these crimes.

Over two years ago an Artificer employed by House Cannith accidentally and inadvertently damaged a series of connected conductor stones while performing regular maintenance. The stones remained functional, but trains passing over the affected stones slowed to half their speed. The slowdown happened gradually and after the trains had passed the affected areas they were able to accelerate back to their regular speed.

The Artificer realized that knowing how to replicate the disruption might be valuable information. He spent the following few months attempting to duplicate the accident before he finally figured out how to do it in a controlled manner. However, during his test he affected the regular operation of numerous lightning rails and was eventually dismissed from his job before he could share his knowledge with House Cannith.

Without a job or reference from House Cannith, the Artificer was without funds. He grew desperate he quietly spread the word that he was selling a device that could stop the trains from running. His timing was perfect. An Eladrin adventuring party hired to steal valuable cargo from a lightning rail were struggling with a way to accomplish their task, the idea of stopping the train between stations had never occurred to them. They enlisting the Artificer’s help and agreed to cut him in on the commission in exchange for his secret. When he explained that he couldn’t actually stop the trains, just slow them down, they were disappointed but still believed that this was an advantage they could work with.

It didn’t take long for them to come up with a workable plan. The Artificer would slow the train and the Eladrins would Fey Step onboard. Once onboard they’d recover the goods and then before the train accelerated back to full speed they’d Fey Step or jump off. It was simplistic, but it worked.

Realizing the potential for huge profit after their first successful mission, the Eladrins decided to rob another lighting rail a few weeks later. They got on and off the trains so quickly that they met little resistance. Continued success encouraged more robberies. They rarely engaged anyone while on the train and when they did they never hurt anyone. They were thieves, not ruffians or murderers. Within a few months they’d accumulated substantial treasure.

House Orien kept word of the thefts quiet and demanded House Deneith stop the Desperadoes and keep the trains safe. However, since the bandits hit trains randomly it was impossible for the Sentinel Marshals to know when or where they’ll strike next. House Deneith realized it was cheaper to reimburse House Orien for material losses than bring in additional resources to counter thieves that strike so randomly and infrequently. The Marshals continue to try to stop or capture the Desperadoes with the resources they already have onboard the lighting rail. Unless the Desperadoes become violent, House Deneith is unlikely to spend any more time or resources perusing them.

The Orien Desperado

After the Desperadoes successfully robbed their fifth lighting rail in two months House Orien demanded the Sentinel Marshals do something to stop them. When it became clear to House Orien that House Deneith was unwilling to put any real effort into stopping the thieves they decided to take matters into their own hands. After all, the lighting rail is a huge source of pride to House Orien, not to mention the means by which the House generates the majority of its revenues. If people stopped shipping goods by lighting rail for fear of theft, House Orien could face serious financial hardship.

Sparing no expense House Orien sought information about the Desperadoes and quickly discovered that they were all Eladrins. House Orien then enlisted the aid of an Eladrin adventurer who had recently manifested the Mark of Passage. Normally the House would have nothing to do with a non-human bearing their House’s Dragonmark, but they felt the situation required it. They agreed to acknowledge the Eladrin as a member of House Orien, complete with full House privileges if he could infiltrate the Desperadoes. He agreed.

The Orien agent easily managed to join the Desperadoes. He leaned how they operated and reported his findings back to House Orien. As the Desperadoes became wealthier they started recruiting new members as the original members sought to relax and live a more comfortable life supported by their ill-gotten gains.

House Orien realized that there was value in keeping their agent in place and letting the Desperadoes continue robbing the lighting rail. Now that House Deneith was reimbursing them for lost cargo, House Orien could insure goods for substantially more than their actual value and have their undercover agent direct the Desperadoes to steal them from the train.

The Orien Desperado is still active and climbing his way up the ladder of seniority and leadership among the group. Until the Sentinel Marshals get more serious about stopping them, House Orien plans to let the Desperadoes function with their agent reporting back on everything they do.

Adventuring Hooks

• The PCs are onboard a lighting rail when the Desperadoes strike and witness them stealing goods from the train. The Desperadoes refuse to engage in combat if engaged and instead flee.
• House Deneith hires the PCs to ride the rails in an attempt to capture one of the Desperadoes.
• An Eladrin PC hears about an opportunity to make some easy money by robbing a lighting rail.

Click on the Eberron tab above the Dungeon’s Master banner to find the previous installments in this ongoing series as well as many other great Eberron articles and resources.

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

One of the DM’s Most important jobs is to keep the game moving. When we find ourselves in a situation where we don’t know the correct rule, we trust the DM to make the call on the fly based on his experience to ensure the game continues. Afterwards we look up the correct ruling in the usual places: PHB, DMG, Rules Compendium, online compendium and online forums. Yet from time-to-time we just can’t find a satisfactory answer to our rules questions. In these circumstances we’ve decided to turn to you, the people who read our blog and play D&D to help us make the call.

In You Make The Call (Part 1) we asked you to provide you thoughts and insights on strange situations that occur when you’re prone, and the ability to adjust the size and damage of area attacks. In this installment we want you to make the call on being dazed. These situations don’t necessarily come up often, but they can have a significant impact on the encounter so we want to get it right.

Can you spend an action point while dazed?

The summer that 4e was released I sat in on a seminar at GenCon where the Wizards R&D team answered a lot of general questions about the new rules. One of the questions that came up was “Can you spend an action point when you’re dazed?” The answer provided at the time was “No.”

In my home game we’ve stuck to that rule ever since. After all, dazed very clearly says that you can take either a standard, a move, or a minor action. Allowing a creature (PC or monster) to spend an action point while dazed doesn’t seem in keeping with the intent of the condition.

Looking at the rules as written there is nothing that explicitly states you cannot use an action point while dazed. After all, spending an action point is a free action and dazed says that you can still take free actions.

So the question remains, can you use an action point when dazed? My group has said no, but we seem to be the only who interpret dazed in this way. During public-play (LRF, D&D Encounters, GenCon) other players and the DMs are always using their action points when dazed. I continue to play that if I’m dazed I can’t (and won’t) spend an action point.

If you’ve already taken at least one action on your turn and then become dazed does your turn end or do you get one more action?

Believe it or not, this happens a lot in my games. Our Wizard has Thunderstaff, a level 5 (daily) Immediate Interrupt. The trigger is an enemy moves to within 2 squares of you. The interrupt lets the Wizard attack and if he hits, the target is deafened and dazed until the end of your next turn. So with some regularity a monster is dazed during his turn. Where we run into some debate is what happens when the daze kicks in?

The players believe that if the monster has already taken an action (which he obviously has in order to trigger the interrupt in the first place) that his turn ends as soon as he becomes dazed. The rationale is that a dazed creature can take either a standard, a move, or a minor action. Since he’s already taken an action his turn is now over.

The DM believes that any actions the monster took before the dazed condition affected him shouldn’t count towards his limit of either a standard, a move, or a minor action. Once he’s dazed he can then do one of these, assuming he has actions left.

Since we play that dazed creatures can’t use action points, the player’s interpretation becomes really powerful against solo monsters that often get multiple attacks and have multiple action points.

If you’re dazed at the beginning of your turn and you manage to remove the dazed with your one action, do you get the remaining compliment of actions?

This is sort of the flip side of getting dazed on your turn. What happens when you get rid of the dazed condition with your one action? We’ve always played that if you can grant yourself a save or use an item to snap out of the dazed condition that you then get the rest of your actions as usual.

I don’t think there’s going to be a lot of debate over how we’ve ruled this one. I think we’ve made the right call here. However, in light of the other questions above there may be some discussion required.

If we rule that getting dazed on your turn ends your turn (assuming you’ve already taken at least one action) then freeing yourself should give you back your full turn when it goes away. However, if we rule that you still get to take one action when you become dazed on your turn, should we revisit what happens when the dazed condition ends on your turn?

As mentioned in You Make The Call (Part 1) it’s important that any ruling be applied constantly to all PCs and monsters. This is a big reason why we’ve had so much debate in our gaming group about dazed. If the PCs can’t use an action point while dazed then this will affect the monsters in the same way. It makes powers that daze more appealing and arguably more powerful, especially against solo monsters. The same holds true for getting dazed during your turn. It doesn’t happen often, but it came up in a recent game when a monster (a Mind Flayer, I believe) dazed a PC on his turn. Should the PC’s turn end or should he get one more action? This PCs had an item that would negate the daze but it required an action to activate so it made a big difference. It brought the whole debate back to the forefront for our gaming group and we are still debating the correct way to rule on this one.

We want you to make the call. Where do you stand on the dazed debate? Have you experienced any of these issues with your gaming group? How did you handle them? For those who had never given these issues much thought before today, how would you rule on these situations at your gaming table?

Related reading:

• Adjudicating and House Rules
• Speeding Up Your Game
• More Tips for Speeding Up Your Game

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

Doesn’t it seem kind of dumb for monsters – or PCs for that matter – to fight until they reach their very last hit point? Don’t any of the combatants in D&D have any sort of survival instinct? What ever happened to the flight part of fight or flight? In most combat scenarios the PCs beat up on the monsters and the monsters don’t back down until they’re dead. Unless the monster has good reason to fight to the end, why would they? The simple answer is that they shouldn’t.

Eventually all battles should reach a point where one side either surrenders or flees. Fighting to the bitter end is just stupid. Yet this is how D&D works. The PCs fight the monsters until one side (most often the monsters) is decimated. In those very rare occurrences when one or two monsters manage to flee the players will often complain that the DM robbed them of a totally victory (at least that’s been my experience). I think that we need to introduce a little bit more common sense into D&D combat and I know just the way to do it.

As it stands the PCs won’t back down because a balanced encounter gives the PCs a very reasonable chance at success. It’s how the game is designed and I’m the first to admit that as a player, I like it this way. Worrying that you PC might die every time they went into battle would make for a very different type of combat system and it absolutely wouldn’t be the D&D we all know today. But what if we made combat a just a little bit more dangerous? And what if, at the same time, we gave more of the monsters the instinctual awareness that they shouldn’t stick around and fight to the death unless they have a really, really good reason to do so? Here’s how we do it.

When the DM creates an encounter he’s got a specific XP budget to work with. As long as he doesn’t exceed this budget, than the encounter is considered “balanced.” Usually this means an equal number of monsters of the same level as the PCs. So five level 6 PCs would face off against five level 6 monsters, more or less. But this assumes that the monsters will fight it out to the bitter end and by doing so they will force the PCs to expend appropriate resources. Therein lays the balance part. But if the monsters suddenly turn tail and run when they reach their bloodied value or when half of their numbers are killed, the party doesn’t expend the resources that the mechanics expect them to. It certainly makes for a more plausible encounter, but behind the scenes the party earns a victory without putting in the expected effort.

The challenge becomes finding some middle ground. Begin by creating a balanced encounter as described above. Then pump up the level of the monsters. Make them all 2-4 levels higher. The important thing to remember after taking this step is that the monsters will flee or surrender when they reach their bloodied value.

Let’s look at an example. We’ll make the encounter simple. Seeking shelter from the cold, the PCs spot a nearby cavern and decide to hole up there until the weather improves. When they enter the cavern they find five Ogres who had the same idea. The Ogres are not the sharing type so combat erupts. Assuming that the PCs are level 6, then these should be standard level 6 Ogres to keep things balanced. This puts their hit points at 90 each; their AC at 18; and their melee basic attack score at +11 doing 2d10+6 damage.

If this were to play out as normal the PCs would have to bring each Ogre down from 90 to 0 hit points in order to be victorious, and they would expend the appropriate resources as expected. However, if we pump up the Ogres to level 8 they will have 111 hit points, their attack scores go up to +13 and their damage becomes 2d10+8. However, these Ogres didn’t become bigger than their normal brethren by luck. They have a keen survival instinct (since they obviously don’t have a whole lot of intelligence). When they become bloodied, or when two of the five are killed, the remaining Ogres flee. It’s one thing to stay warm and dry during a storm, it’s another thing entirely to get killed for being dry.

Assuming that the Ogres will flee when bloodied the PCs now only have to eat through 55 hit points each, rather than the 90 in the original setup. The monsters are a little bit harder to hit and will likewise hit the PCs a little bit more often, but in the end the resource expenditure (including healing surges) should be about what they’d expect to use during a normal fight against five level 6 Ogres.

Even though these were level 8 monsters, the desired outcome is approximately the same as fighting level 6 monsters to the death. With that in mind, I’d award XP as if the party fought level 6 monsters. If the PCs decided to give chase and slaughter the Ogres even after it was clear they were running away, then I don’t see any reason to reward extra XP because they brought them down from 55 to 0 hit points. In fact I wouldn’t even bother playing it out since it would have little bearing on the bigger picture.

Where this kind of tweaking of the numbers and levels becomes a bit more complicated is when the PCs won’t let the monsters escape or surrender, or in circumstances where the monsters have a good reason to fight to the death.

Using the same set up, the Ogres would have no choice but to fight if the PCs blocked the only exit from the room or executed the first Ogre to surrender. If these Ogres were protecting their offspring it would certainly give even these dim-witted creatures motive to fight on and try to drive the PCs from the cave. In circumstances where the DM knows the monsters are more than likely going to fight to the death then he should leave things as they are and let the level 6 PCs fight level 6 monsters. But any good DM will realize that in most circumstances the monsters won’t have a good reason to fight to the bitter end and that tweaking the numbers encourages the PCs to let the fleeing monsters go.

Making the monsters just a couple of levels more powerful than the XP budget allows will certainly make the fights more challenging, but it should make them a lot shorter and will definitely add a level of realism sorely lacking in most D&D encounters. It won’t take long before the players realize that more and more of the monsters are surrendering or fleeing. One added bonus to having monsters surrender is that the PCs can talk to them. This could give some players the motivation they need to choose feats and powers that give them additional languages or better skill checks in Diplomacy or Insight.

Just because D&D usually includes excessive amounts of hack and slash doesn’t mean that it has to continue to be that way. Have your monsters behave as you’d behave in their pace. Monsters with intelligence will realize they’re outmatched and flee. Those that rely on instinct will often come to the same conclusion in the same circumstances. So don’t have the monsters fight to the death, have them do the sensible thing and cut their losses.

How often do monsters surrender or flee in your game? How often do the PCs surrender or flee? Should a party facing a tougher monster get the full XP, even though the DM intentionally had the monsters only fight until they were bloodied?

Related reading:

• Should Monsters Employ Smart Tactics?
• Let Monsters Use the Treasure
• Retreat Is Always An Option, At Least It Should Be

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!

While the Dungeon’s Master team enjoys some well-deserved vacation time, we’re breaking out the greatest hits and shining a spotlight on a few of our favourite articles from 2011. We’ve searched for hidden gems that our newer readers might have missed and our long-time readers will enjoy reading again. Enjoy a second look at these greatest hits from Dungeon’s Master.

Of all the articles I wrote in 2011, the article on two-hit minions is one of the ones I’m most proud of. Most of our articles are tips, tricks and advice for how to improve your game or make it more fun; rarely do we try and introduce any new mechanics. The two-hit minion was an exception. It was a mechanic that Sterling first suggested almost two years earlier, but when we actually started using the two-hit minions regularly this article was born and the feedback was very positive.

It took a few sessions of play testing before I believe I found the right balance for running two-hit minions, and each time we tweaked the mechanic the players confirmed that it was getting better. I’ve been using two-hit minions in my games, especially D&D Encounters, for about six months now and they always make the game more interesting. The players love the rush that comes from mowing down a bunch of minions, but they really love that some of those minions have the strength to take a hit and get right back up.

I’ve also learned that the key to two-hit minions it not to overuse them. This is good advice for minions in general, but is even better advice when it comes to the two-hit variation. By switching it up and mixing regular minions in with two-hit minions, players stop making broad assumptions about monsters until they actually have a chance to engage them. They no longer assume that six identical minis are going to be minions that will fall with one hit. Now they take into consideration the possibility that some or all of them might survive a blast from the controller so they need to be ready for that eventuality.a

From July 13, 2011, Dungeon’s Master once again presents: Two-Hit Minions.

The two-hit minion isn’t new. We first suggested the idea over two years ago in one of our very first articles, More Than Just Minions. It was a reaction to DMs who felt that the normal minions were lacking something. I’ve felt that way for a while now and a few months ago I decided it was time to start using two-hit minions on a regular basis. The results were fantastic.

During this season of D&D Encounters we’ve been running tables with very large parties. The more heroes there are in the party, the more monsters I’ve placed on the map. However, week after week of just adding more monsters was starting to get a little bit boring, not to mention that it led to combat encounters that were taking a very long time to complete. I knew that I needed to shake things up and my solution was two-hit minions.

When I was using regular minions I found that the players, upon learning which opponents had only 1 hit point, treated the minions differently than other monsters. A lot of the PCs ignored them. The PCs with powers that could target multiple creatures (usually the controllers) would often eliminate all the minions in one round. It was very unsatisfying for the players and for me as the DM. Enter two-hit minions.

The players had no idea what was happening. They saw 12 monsters on the board and assumed (correctly) that at least some were minions. In this case eight were minions, four were not. But when the first PC attacked a minion and it didn’t die the PCs had to quickly reassess the situation. It took the players a couple of rounds before they realized that these were indeed minions, but they weren’t minions as they understood them. The result was unprecedented teamwork.

Mechanics

As the name implies it takes two hits to destroy a two-hit minion. However, I’ve added a couple of other quarks to the two-hit minions as I’ve refined them through play-testing. After the first hit the minion is bloodied. This serves two purposes. First it lets the players know which minions will fall with a single hit and which ones still need two hits. The second is that some PCs can do different things against bloodied opponents than they can against non-bloodied opponents. So one hit: bloodied, two hits: dead.

The only exception is on a natural 20. In those rare instances when a PC crits a two-hit minions I’ve counted it as two hits and that minions is destroyed. Now players don’t feel like a crit on a minion is a wasted 20.

As an additional reward to PCs that bloody two-hit minions, I started having the creatures fall prone when they got hit the first time, but not automatically or all the time. The attack score had to exceed the defense the PC was targeting by 5 or more. Originally I had them falling prone all the time on any hit, but it didn’t really make them seem that much better than regular minions. By rewarding a high attack roll in this way the PCs made more effort to work together to flank and get combat advantage on that first hit. It also reinforces the idea that you should always do the math and call out the total attack roll and not just say “I rolled a 17.” Sure a 17 will hit, but if the total isn’t above 21 than the minion is still on his feet.

The whole purpose of using two-hit minions was to add danger and excitement to the encounter. I wasn’t trying to make the minions uber-powerful. I just wanted a way to make them more menacing and to keep them around a little bit longer. I felt that having them fall prone on the first hit (assuming the attack score exceeded the target number by 5 or more) gave players a sense of satisfaction even though they didn’t kill the minion outright. It was also a way to reward the PCs because now that minion was granting combat advantage to melee attackers. If the minion was still alive on its turn it now had to use its move action standing up.

Increased Teamwork and Tactics

When the players learned that two-hit minions were now a mainstay in my encounters, it gave them a real incentive to work together. They actually talked about a coordinated attack pattern to take out the minions and didn’t just leave them for the controllers to handle. Sometimes the controllers worked to bloody all the minions early, that way any PC could kill a minion with one shot. Knowing that there was a good chance of knocking a fresh two-hit minion prone allowed PCs to help allies in distress. Threatened PCs could now move far enough away from a prone minion that they didn’t have to worry about getting attacked on the monster’s next turn.

The other tactic that quickly caught on at the table was for two PCs to delay until they were on the same number in the initiative and then engage the minions together. One PC (usually a defender) went first and attacked the nearest minion. As part of the attack the defender would mark it. The second PC would then attack the same one. If they both hit, then the minions was dead. If either missed then at least the minion was marked and would engage the defender. If the defender wasn’t available then the Ranger usually took point knowing that he had a good chance of killing a two-hit minion himself.

Players also began to see the importance of Wizards and Rangers when fighting two-hit minions. When facing a bunch of typical minions, a Wizard and Ranger can easily take down two a piece on their turn. But with two-hit minions the Wizard can’t kill any by himself. He can bloody many, but they’re all going to be alive and dangerous on their turn (although possibly prone). The Ranger on the other hand is capable of making multiple attacks on the same creature – an important distinction. So he can actually destroy a two-hit minion by himself on his turn. Now there’s one less to threaten the party.

A battlefield littered with bloodied two-hit minions becomes a shooting gallery for a Wizard with Magic Missile. Since Magic Missile always hits (even if the minion is prone), this becomes the fastest and easiest way to get rid of any bloodied two-hit minions.

The strikers more than any other class seem to hate the two-hit minions. Players running strikers often feel that their incredible damage should count for something else against a two-hit minion. After all, even the lowliest PC can destroy a two-hit minion with two successful attacks that each deal 1 point of damage. Meanwhile a striker is likely to dole out significantly more damage on his turn but still need to hit the minion twice. In a game just this week a level 1 Warlock inflicted over 20 points of damage on two consecutive rounds against a two-hit minion (both with at-will attacks). It still killed the monster, but the player really felt that all of that extra damage was wasted.

The lesson the party learned from this was to let the strikers focus on the non-minions and have everyone else take care of the two-hit minions so that the extra damage was put to its best use. I suppose is a valid argument even when fighting normal minions. The exception being Rangers, as we’ve already noted above.

Building Better Minions

Over the past few months I’ve used a lot of two-hit minions with a lot of different gaming groups (most notably at D&D Encounters). After each session I asked the players for feedback and refined the concept based on their comments. All in all the players have embraced the two-hit minions. They really liked the idea that they were knocked prone when first hit and didn’t have any issues with needing a really high attack roll to do it.

The only feedback that I’ve received that I haven’t been able to decide on how to handle is with regards to daily and encounter powers. Some players felt that if they used an encounter or daily power that it should count as two hits and destroy the minions. In a way I understand that argument, after all it’s a more powerful ability so using it and not killing a minions is likely to frustrate many players.

For now I’m still demanding that PCs score two hits, regardless of what kind of power is used and I have a few good reasons for doing so. Many D&D Essentials builds do not have encounter or daily powers in the same way as non-Essentials builds. This means that some PCs would have an edge when battling two-hit minions that other do not and I don’t think that’s fair. Having two-hit minions react differently to at-will, encounter and daily powers means that the DM would have to keep track of one more thing during combat, and that’s not something I’m willing to do as a DM.

Finally I look at how powers are used against minions today. Most PCs, once they realize that they’re facing minions, won’t use anything more powerful than an at-will attack. My though is that if you’re using a bigger power against your opponents then you obviously feel that the situation calls for it. If the target happens to be a minion and you use an encounter of daily power against it then that’s just too bad. In fact just last week my level 20 Warlord used a daily power on a minion. The party was in desperate need of healing and the power would only grant it on a successful hit. The 3[W] damage was absolutely wasted, but the healing it provided was not.

What are you thoughts on two-hit minions? Have you ever used them? Are you likely to use them moving forward? What feedback or criticism do you have on the mechanics as I’ve described them above? My goal is to make the two-hit minions as good as they can be while still being a balanced part of the encounter so please let me know what you think.

Related reading:

• More Than Just Minions
• My Love Affair With Minions
• Building Better Monsters Part 3: Making the Monster Fit the Bill

Looking for instant updates? Subscribe to the Dungeon’s Master feed!