D&D 5E I just don't buy the reasoning behind "damage on a miss".

[I'm A Banana]

Other than the rules in the DMG pp 42, 65 and 66.

Sure, and Rule Zero means that 3e doesn't really have an issue with grapple rules or caster/fighter disparity.

 

[skotothalamos]

One problem I haven't seen addressed yet is what's been referred to as the "pixie dodge" problem. What is it about a mundane weapon attack makes it inescapable by anything? .

The amazing skill of the attacker is what makes that weapon seemingly inescapable. Can we not give this fighter/ranger/paladin his due for giving up a class feature that would allow him to block enemy attacks against his allies, or have higher defenses? He has devoted his training to being very dangerous to be around.

As for the pixie dodge, well, most of the time pixies can just effortlessly flit out of the way, but not against this maniac. He just swung that giant axe around himself so swiftly that -- even though the invisible pixie flitted out of the way -- there was another wild swing arcing way too close for comfort, and then another one. Wow, all these sudden moves are getting exhausting. We should track that somewhere. Do we have any mechanic that reflects a combatant's ability to continue fighting? Maybe we should knock a few chunks off of that pool, and maybe our pixie friend should just back away slowly from the madman with the axe.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Would people be more comfortable if GWF used the Balance and Climb mechanics? IE:

Miss target AC by more than 5, you fail entirely.
Miss target AC by 1 to 5, you partially succeed and partially fail (strength damage).

I just don't like the mechanic no matter how much gravy you pour on it.

I would like to have an alternative that I could give the two hander.

 

[bogmad]

The amazing skill of the attacker is what makes that weapon seemingly inescapable. Can we not give this fighter/ranger/paladin his due for giving up a class feature that would allow him to block enemy attacks against his allies, or have higher defenses? He has devoted his training to being very dangerous to be around.

As for the pixie dodge, well, most of the time pixies can just effortlessly flit out of the way, but not against this maniac. He just swung that giant axe around himself so swiftly that -- even though the invisible pixie flitted out of the way -- there was another wild swing arcing way too close for comfort, and then another one. Wow, all these sudden moves are getting exhausting. We should track that somewhere. Do we have any mechanic that reflects a combatant's ability to continue fighting? Maybe we should knock a few chunks off of that pool, and maybe our pixie friend should just back away slowly from the madman with the axe.

Then why can't a guy with a rapier do the same thing? If the fallback is that you tire a guy out by all the crazy swinging, then fine, but what is it about Great Weapon Fighting that makes it more suitable for that than anything else?

If we're going to pick a special ability for Great Weapon Fighting I'd rather it be something that fits better than just a place to shoehorn in damage on a miss.

 

[billd91]

Would people be more comfortable if GWF used the Balance and Climb mechanics? IE:

Miss target AC by more than 5, you fail entirely.
Miss target AC by 1 to 5, you partially succeed and partially fail (strength damage).

As I've posted before in this or the other thread roiling over the exact same topic, yes. That would be much better. I could see quibbling about the miss amount, but I think the design is a lot more sound than always doing damage on a miss.

 

[skotothalamos]

I just don't like the mechanic no matter how much gravy you pour on it.

I would like to have an alternative that I could give the two hander.

I particularly like the 4e powers that let you add in your CON bonus to damage with a two-handed weapon. It's a nice abstraction that rewards people for putting points into a stat that makes sense for someone who is swinging a giant hunk of metal around for long(ish) periods of time.

If we assume a well-built character has about a 50% chance of hitting, damage on a miss should help about as often as extra damage on a hit. If I were replacing damage-on-a-miss for someone who doesn't like it, I would say GWF adds CON bonus to damage on hits with two-handed weapons (and versatile weapons wielded in two hands). It constrains the character's build quite a bit, but if your great weapon fighter wasn't going STR/CON, he was already pretty weird.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Would people be more comfortable if GWF used the Balance and Climb mechanics? IE:

Miss target AC by more than 5, you fail entirely.
Miss target AC by 1 to 5, you partially succeed and partially fail (strength damage).

No. I'd be okay if attacks in general, but as constituted it doesn't sound like a character ability, more like a different way of modeling hits and misses in general. And if you're going to do this, I think it'd be better to throw out the existing damage paradigm entirely and simply have damage be a function of attack - AC, which is a pretty common thing that rpgs in general do.

 

[TwoSix]

As for the pixie dodge, well, most of the time pixies can just effortlessly flit out of the way, but not against this maniac. He just swung that giant axe around himself so swiftly that -- even though the invisible pixie flitted out of the way -- there was another wild swing arcing way too close for comfort, and then another one. Wow, all these sudden moves are getting exhausting. We should track that somewhere. Do we have any mechanic that reflects a combatant's ability to continue fighting? Maybe we should knock a few chunks off of that pool, and maybe our pixie friend should just back away slowly from the madman with the axe.

There is no pixie dodge problem. Pixies already have an ability to avoid the evil auto-hitting GHF. It's called a fly speed. That's what agile combatants should be doing, never staying close to a fighter with a sword.
If you want pixies to be able negate damage with their incredible speed, then give them an ability that does that. Let them roll a Dex save to avoid melee attacks, for example.

 

[TwoSix]

No. I'd be okay if attacks in general, but as constituted it doesn't sound like a character ability, more like a different way of modeling hits and misses in general. And if you're going to do this, I think it'd be better to throw out the existing damage paradigm entirely and simply have damage be a function of attack - AC, which is a pretty common thing that rpgs in general do.

This I absolutely agree with. Pick your paradigm and carry it through. The part about GWF I find annoying is that's it buried in one spec of one class. Either make DoaM a hallmark of the system or don't use it at all.

 

[TwoSix]

Sure, and Rule Zero means that 3e doesn't really have an issue with grapple rules or caster/fighter disparity.

We already had that thread. It lasted over a month and ~1,900 posts. I think we can avoid rehashing that topic till next year, thanks.