D&D 5E Open Letter to Mike Mearls from a pro game dev

[Minigiant]

Well the purpose of GWF was to mitigate misses.

With Next's squishy PCs and only having 1 attack per action, they had to give a melee GW warrior something to contribute if he misses. Because it is pretty bad if your nondefensive melee guy deals no damage for 3 or more turns as he is probably taking damage or dying in the mean time.

Maybe Damage on a miss is not the best way to mitigate a GW warrior's miss streak. Maybe a bonus attack if you miss could be better but the design team kinda hate bonus attacks.

 

[delericho]

Well that was fast. One thorough, reasoned OP, and six pages of posts that don't even try to make a case to the contrary. I'm still waiting for a real answer as to what the other side of this argument is.

Well, bearing in mind that I don't like "damage on a miss" and would rather see it removed, I can see two counter-arguments:

- hit points, by their nature, are always going to be somewhat abstract. There's no clear dividing line between "luck", "exhaustion", "divine favour", "plot protection", and "actual wounds". That being the case, damage on a miss can be justified easily enough - if the creature isn't previously bloodied then it just represents exhaustion; if they were, then the effort of getting out the way obviously aggravated their pre-existing wounds. The only remaining oddity comes if the creature simply had very low hit points to start with. (Which is one reason 4e's rule that minions never took damage on a miss was a good one.)

- to a certain extent, damage on a miss has been in the game for a very long time - right back as far as 1st Ed there have been spells that auto-hit (magic missile) and many more that do damage even on a successful save (fireball). So, this is just the Fighter getting his hand on some of this goodness.

I'm sure there's more, but those are the two arguments that occur to me.

 

[Sage Genesis]

In a game where armor makes you harder to hit rather harder to hurt I don't find it at all strange that an attack can damage on a miss. Because a "miss" is not a complete disconnect that only swings through the empty air, it's also connecting blows that didn't manage to penetrate armor and other forms of contact that aren't worthy of tracking as hit point loss. I have no reason to believe that a fantasy expert in huge weapons can do some minimum amount of damage even when an attack "misses" because even the lesser contacts could be devastating compared to a light weapon in the hands of a warrior without such expertise.

The only real inconsistency I see here is that the rest of the game doesn't quite work like that. It would be better if the game recognized more forms of "glancing blows" like this. Maybe every miss ought to be a "glancing blow", which normally causes no damage or other effects except where noted. (In other words: the game would function pretty much exactly as it does right now.) Only a natural 1 would be a real, full miss in this scenario or some other mechanic could handle it like bringing back "touch AC" from 3e except with a bit more polish put into it. It's a pity that Next didn't go for something like this because it would've both addressed concerns like these and opened up potential new design space. But a spell like Shocking Grasp would be an ideal candidate to make use of such rules, because even a lighter tough or near-hit could case a few sparks to jump over. A Flame Tongue might do some fire damage on every full hit and still do a bit of fire damage (but not the cutting sword damage) if it only hits touch AC. Stuff like that.


Of course, none of this is new.

This has been said dozens of times over by now in various threads. We're just going through the motions again because Mysterious Designer X dredged up the issue. Except this time the presentation was so obnoxious that even the people who ought to be on his side are now half-jokingly reversing their position. If this was some ploy to make people more sympathetic to damage on a miss, it was a work of genius.

 

[Dausuul]

On a related note, would anyone else like to speculate how many actual game devs take home a regular six figure salary? Based on the general size of the RPG market, I'm guessing that number is about a dozen or so. Maybe less.

My guess is much more precise: Zero. I don't believe any tabletop RPG developers pull down six figures for RPG development. Now, if you work on computer or console games, sure, but that's a whole different ball of wax. It doesn't mean you're an expert on tabletop design, any more than knowing how to do graphic design for websites makes you an expert on back-end databases.

I'm no fan of damage on a miss. But I'm even less of a fan of arrogance, arguments from authority, and the attitude that "Anything I don't do must be easy."

Well that was fast. One thorough, reasoned OP, and six pages of posts that don't even try to make a case to the contrary. I'm still waiting for a real answer as to what the other side of this argument is. Seems to me like logic and reason against spite and vitriol. A microcosm of many things, I suppose.

Reasoned? It's full of poor logic and flat-out errors:

• The higher level you get, and thus better accuracy, the less the fighter will benefit from his fighting style. As you gain levels, you can expect to fight more foes with high AC, so the benefit remains.
  
• Thrown versatile weapons such as warhammers, spears and tridents can never miss a prone, invisible target when thrown. This is absurd. GWF only applies in melee.
  
• All objects being attacked, no matter how small or well guarded, will be automatically destroyed. This has nothing to do with GWF. 5E doesn't have damage reduction for objects, so if you take enough whacks at anything, you'll destroy it no matter what. I would like to see this remedied, but changing GWF won't help. On the other hand, if Gorgoroth means "destroyed in one swing," then s/he's simply wrong; objects have hit points and most of them have more than 5.
• No human is so perfect that he can never fail to harm his opponent any time he attacks them. No human is so perfect that s/he can count on being able to survive a hit from a longsword, either. This is irrelevant.
  
• If used against PCs, they will not appreciate the DM being able to kill them without any input or agency from either D20s or damage dice. Automatic unavoidable damage hits PCs all the time. If you're caught in a fireball and don't have some kind of Evasion-type ability, you take a minimum of 3 damage no matter what. This complaint is just silly.
  
• It ignores which weapon you're using, so a longsword used two-handed has the same effect as a greatsword or greataxe. Removing the importance of weapon selection is something feedback rejected. GWF does not "remove the importance of weapon selection." It just means weapon selection doesn't matter to the amount of damage you do when you miss. Hey, you know what? If you don't have GWF, your weapon selection still doesn't affect the amount of damage you do when you miss.
• It completely negates all defensive fighting styles : AC +1 ? Useless. Granting disadvantage? Useless. Investing into 30 AC, with artifacts, spells, buffs, invisibility, disadvantage? Useless. Bollocks. If your opponent has GWF, you are still better off not being hit (taking only Strength mod damage) than being hit (taking Strength mod plus weapon damage plus other bonus damage).
• There is no point in rolling to-hit or damage when a fighter attacks a foe he knows has less than his GWF damage. This can be
  20, or it could be 50, 60 per round. Insta-kill terminators, here we come! This is just completely off the rails. The highest Strength score a PC can ever have in 5E is 29, and that's using an artifact! The absolute highest you could ever possibly deal with GWF is 36 per round, and that's at 20th level. Without artifacts, it's 20. 50-60 is flat impossible. If you're going to say stuff like this, I don't see how you can expect anyone to take you seriously.

Et cetera, et cetera. And then on top of that we have the loud and repeated appeals to authority. Like I said, I am actually on Gorgoroth's side: I don't like damage on a miss and want it gone. But this open letter combines arrogance and wrongness in such a noxious way that, like Mistwell, I kind of want to switch sides just to avoid being associated with it.

 

[Mistwell]

Hanging out on Enworld is not a credential. (hint : credentials are those things where others consider your opinions and talents to be worth actual currency)

If you were a professional developer you'd put your credentials out for everyone to see. There are many developers on this board, and I represent some of them as an attorney. Actual professionals do not fear people knowing who they are and what they specifically do. Frauds, on the other hand, would claim to be a professional but then come up with excuses as to why they could not reveal what they specifically do...which is the behavior you're engaged in right now. You understand this. You even included in your initial message that you knew we would not believe you, because you knew your claim sounded fraudulent. So, I am doing exactly what you logically thought should happen - dismissing your claim.

Now, I do know two paid consultants for 5e. I could have actually helped you, had you behaved politely.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Man, I hate these "trust me, I'm awesome" posts that appear once in a while here and in some other message boards I follow. Why people feel it's necessary to ground their opinions in this kind of fake authority? It's terrible.

Cheers,

 

[Jester David]

Oh Damage on a Miss. That game mechanic that was not missed, that no one mentioned for eighteen months, was not brought up as a representational part of 4e, and was the subject of zero threads. Until it was added to the package and someone complained, and then SUDDENLY it became the most important mechanic ever and simply had to be in the game or some players will not buy D&D Next.

This is not an exaggeration as there are a number of "deal breaker" threads posted, both here and similar sites, and "no DoaM" is frequently added.

When this topic comes up I always like to bring up my pizza analogy.

You're ordering pizza with a friend and you like da spicy. You'd like the pollo el fuego pizza. But your friend can't handle spice. Not having spicy pizza diminishes the meal for you but you can still eat an enjoy a pizza because it's still, well, pizza. However, spicy food prevents your friend from enjoying the pizza at all. While most pizza places will do 1/2 and 1/2 pizzas, this is never 100%; you won't notice a stray mushroom hidden under cheese but someone who is spice intolerant will notice a jalapeño.
It'd be the height of selfishness to tell a friend - or anyone really - that they cannot have any pizza they enjoy because you want food they cannot comfortably swallow.


People who like DoaM enjoy that mechanic. But it's not an essential part of the game, being wholly removable, not being tied to any other mechanic and only really being introduced recently. People who don't like it really don't like and it hurts their enjoyment of the game.
There's a bunch of other arguments for why DoaM is "bad". The fact the topic of DoaM (and problems people have with DoaM) keep coming up again and again but different people is a testament to the fact this is a sticky subject.
But, in the end, those arguments are all irrelevant as you can reduce the debate into pushing people away or welcoming people to the game.

 

[Mistwell]

In case people forgot this guy, this is what happened last time he was here after repeated mod warnings about his bizarre behavior:

Sanitizing art to avoid offending people is morally no different than burning books.

Morrus, this will be my last post here, but I will post the article I came across since apparently some of you think it's creepy that some of us, you know, read.

People referring to a scientific study as "creepy" says more about them, that I. It's certainly pointless for me to continue debating this, for one, it's not my field (nor any of yours' obviously, considering how blithely ignorant of the topic you all are), and I don't call it censorship when mods step in and assert their own opinions are more valid than mine, I call it water cooler bullying, which is, to answer your question, why I ignore it.

You are not the boss of me. Delete this account, thanks. I won't make a new one.

And in response Morrus said he left and let it be.

But, this is a guy who exhibited very bizarre behavior, made some insulting comments about women, bashed the mods openly, and asked that his account be deleted. I don't know about you, but my tolerance for hypocrites like that is pretty low.

 

[fjw70]

I don't care if DoaM is in the game or not. I just find it amusing that so many people make a big deal about it one way or the other.

 

[Sage Genesis]

In case people forgot this guy:.

Something is funky with the link in that quote. It takes me to some completely unrelated thread about a Bow of True Arrows, for some reason.