"Hit" and "Miss"

[Philotomy Jurament]

Here's how I describe hits/misses/damage in D&D.

 

[Nifft]

I use "Hit" and "Fail".

Cheers, -- N

 

[Felix]

You can use phases like "your flurry of slashes and cuts", "your devastating combination", and just give a summary of each players actions that way but I tend to stick to describing killing blows and criticals in detail and using "hit and miss" for everything else.

Don't describe the hit; describe what the enemy does in reaction to the hit. If he keeps on plugging without regarding the blow, the PCs will know it didn't really phase him.

If the hit takes him to 1/4 of his HP, then he starts to grunt and look for ways out of the fight. Make enemies actually retreat; at very least it would be novel.

Describing how the enemies react to the PCs beating them up works better than the "slashing fury of twin swords cuts mercilessly into his torso, releasing a arterial spray of green ichor" approach to each hit.

 

[Scribble]

What word can we say to describe an attack that failed to get through the target's AC but didn't necessarily completely miss him?

Bullgrit
Total Bullgrit

Suck.

You tried to hurt him, but you suck.

 

[cougent]

PC: I rolled a 27
DM: DAMMIT!
PC: I'll rool damage now

PC: I rolled a 23
DM: Ha HA (Simpson's laugh)
PC: [expletive]

 

[Twowolves]

When a guy in my group took over as DM for a couple of sessions to give me a break, he used the method of resolving all the attacks and actions for the round then gave us a detailed description of what had just happened, based on what everyone did.

It worked really well, and although I don't have the same natural flair that he does, it is something that I'm trying to introduce into the game when I DM.

And personally, when someone misses someones Touch AC I consider it a miss. When the attack beat the Touch AC, but not their actual AC I describe the attack as bouncing off the armour/stopped by magical protection or whatever may be relevant to that particular character. I think it helps to give the players an idea of how hard or easy the person/monster they are fighting may be to defeat.

Olaf the Stout

Back in a 2ned game I ran, it was very fighter-type heavy, so I would do something like this in addition to describing each hit. It was very much like describing fight choreography, and the players loved it.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

"You hit him, but only managed to hit-or-miss him off"

 

[Festivus]

I tried the whole "descriptive" thing, but after 20, 50, 100 times in one game session, it wears thin. "Hit" and "miss," being one syllable words, are much easier -- they're faster and definite, especially when the target of the attack can be anything from a man in armor to a slimy monster, a scaled dragon, or a wispy, incorporeal shadow.

Bullgrit
Total Bullgrit

What I do is put the combat scene into my head, visualizing everything as if it was an action scene in a movie.

I had a player attack a kobold with a spiked chain, I described it as "the chain whipped around the kobold's snout several times"... then awaited the damage roll... and when it was sufficient to kill the creature I went on to say "You then pull back on the chain, detaching the snout from the kobold. The kobold blinks in disbelief for a moment before reeling backwards, a spray of blood pulsing from it's face as it falls."

It does get hard after a while... how many times can you shoot an arrow at an opponent and have it sound original. Sometimes I will say something like "The arrow flies across the room, finding it's mark merely a hair away from the last arrow still embedded in it's shoulder".

It's fun to describe misses sometimes too, like "The arrow goes wide of it's target and strikes a rock, killing it dead."

 

[nerfherder]

"Hit" and "miss" have always been inaccurate descriptions of what attack rolls vs. AC result in. That is, you can actually hit an opponent without getting through his AC, such as an attack against a person with average Dexterity wearing plate armor, or against a big monster with thick skin (natural armor).

It's funny, but in 27 years of playing D&D, this "hit and miss" concept has never bothered me until recently. Even with D&D3's acceptance of the concept, with touch AC and flatfooted AC actually called out, it's never bugged me until now.

We need new words to describe the success and failure to get through an opponent's AC. "Hurt" or "harm" kind of work, and I've been using them a bit lately.

Player: "I got a 27."
DM: "You hurt him. Roll damage."

But what word for "miss"?

Player: "I got a 25."
DM: "You missed him."
Player: "I missed him with a 25!?"
DM: "Well, you hit him; you just didn't get through his armor."

What word can we say to describe an attack that failed to get through the target's AC but didn't necessarily completely miss him?

Bullgrit
Total Bullgrit

Of course, you have to remember that a "hit" (roll > AC) doesn't necessarily mean that you have actually hit him - losing hit points can mean that he has dodged out of the way, or that a bit of his luck has ran out. This is why it's not a good idea to think too hard about D&D combat in terms of simulation!

 

[JRR_Talking]

hit him for damage
you dont hit him for damage

there are a squillion narrative games out there, so D&D doesnt need to



John