Pathfinder 2E We need a damage on a miss forum again!!

[Tony Vargas]

? I remember my initial reaction to this in 4e was negative, but then realized it was no big deal. Same with 13th Age. If it's easy to explain, it'll work fine.

I don't recall much negativity at all durring the run if 4e. In 4e, all attacks, including spells like fireball, took attack rolls so did half damage on a miss. The mechanic was pervasive, and very common on spells.

With the 5e playtest returned to resolving attack spells with saves, the DoaM mechanic when it cropped up in a combat style, could be singled out, and was.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The types of disguise that a wizard could effectively pull off would be rather limited, in any case.

There's always the disguise self and alter self spells.

, and you'll give yourself away the second you cast a spell regardless.

I suppose you could go all the way with silent/still metamagic...

 

[Sunseeker]

There's always the disguise self and alter self spells.

I suppose you could go all the way with silent/still metamagic...

And if you don't need to use gestures or speak magic words or use components, then you might as well throw in some heavy armor mastery on top. Just climb up on a horse and now you're the party paladin instead of the party wizard. Wizadin? Palazard?

 

[Arilyn]

I don't recall much negativity at all durring the run if 4e. In 4e, all attacks, including spells like fireball, took attack rolls so did half damage on a miss. The mechanic was pervasive, and very common on spells.

With the 5e playtest returned to resolving attack spells with saves, the DoaM mechanic when it cropped up in a combat style, could be singled out, and was.

It was definitely a bigger negative deal in 5e, although, 4e was the edition that caused my initial negative reaction. Then I realized it wasn't a problem, so when it cropped up in the 5e playtest, I just shrugged, and moved on.

 

[Ancalagon]

.... it could be a decoy.

Put in a change you know will not be well received - a minor but irritating one. People complain. Remove it. "See, Paizo listens to feedback!"

But I'm probably just paranoid.

Like that time in 2012 I told my friends to stop taking personality quizzes on Facebook.

 

[Charlaquin]

.... it could be a decoy.

Put in a change you know will not be well received - a minor but irritating one. People complain. Remove it. "See, Paizo listens to feedback!"

But I'm probably just paranoid.

Like that time in 2012 I told my friends to stop taking personality quizzes on Facebook.

I said the same thing, though jokingly. It could be a decoy, but I don't think it is.

 

[CapnZapp]

I get why "damage on a miss" isn't for everyone.

But really, shouldn't it at least be for fighters? I mean hitting things is their DEAL. They don't have anything else. Shouldn't they be so good at it that they're able to turn failure into at least some kind of success?

Fighters are already excellent in combat; and since combat is easily 66% of most people's campaigns, they're doing fine.

Hint: if you know your upcoming campaign features loads and loads of social encounters, but very little combat, don't play a fighter, play a Valor Bard!

Normally that class isn't sturdy enough for challenging combat, but for a combat-light campaign it's adequate. And your Charisma will be very useful in a social campaign.

Likewise, in an explore-heavy campaign, play a Beastmaster melee Ranger!

In the default combat-centric mode (such as every published official hardback to date) this subclass really suffers, while exploration isn't a focus. But with only light opposition, you and your animal companion will do just fine.

But don't treat combat like just another pillar, because it's not.

And having one class focused on the main activity of D&D - combat - is just fine, and the Fighter class needs no other skills.

Besides, the 5E Fighter is already much more versatile and flexible than any fighter before it.

 

[Arakasius]

The battlemaster in 5e is fine, but I wouldn’t call 5e fighters particularly versatile or fun to play. It’s just attack, bonus action attack for your entire career. It’s not very exciting. Bounded accuracy in fifth makes every class be able to contribute to skills outside combat, so the fighter is no different than any other class since the difference between two classes is only going to be a few points. (mostly the stat mod plus a couple more points from your 2 starting proficiencies) But that’s not due to anything from the class, the 5e Fighter is actually fairly limited, repetitive and dull.

 

[Sunseeker]

Fighters are already excellent in combat; and since combat is easily 66% of most people's campaigns, they're doing fine.

Hint: if you know your upcoming campaign features loads and loads of social encounters, but very little combat, don't play a fighter, play a Valor Bard!

Normally that class isn't sturdy enough for challenging combat, but for a combat-light campaign it's adequate. And your Charisma will be very useful in a social campaign.

Likewise, in an explore-heavy campaign, play a Beastmaster melee Ranger!

In the default combat-centric mode (such as every published official hardback to date) this subclass really suffers, while exploration isn't a focus. But with only light opposition, you and your animal companion will do just fine.

But don't treat combat like just another pillar, because it's not.

And having one class focused on the main activity of D&D - combat - is just fine, and the Fighter class needs no other skills.

Besides, the 5E Fighter is already much more versatile and flexible than any fighter before it.

Having a class devoted to entirely 1 pillar of the game means that you're going to miss out on 2/3rds of the game.

I may not be the best at the maths, but I'm fairly certain that 2/3rds of the game is more than 1/3rd.

Also: in 5E a Valor Bard can out-damage a Fighter.

 

[Charlaquin]

Having a class devoted to entirely 1 pillar of the game means that you're going to miss out on 2/3rds of the game.

I may not be the best at the maths, but I'm fairly certain that 2/3rds of the game is more than 1/3rd.

Also: in 5E a Valor Bard can out-damage a Fighter.

Despite the Three Pillars concept WotC is still trying to peddle, in actual practice combat takes up far more than a third of the game.