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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like it. Although with that exception in play, I'd expect to see a broadening of DoaM effects. (Or DoaF, damage on a fail. I like pass-fail better than hit-miss.) Hit-miss puts too much intent-based resolution into a task-based declaration for me.

Oh, @Manbearcat , check out this thread when you have a chance...I think you'd appreciate the discussion. http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?707167-Intent-based-vs-Task-based-Resolution

Looking at the title, I'm sure I'd appreciate it. Its central to some of this discussion and cuts to a lof ot the core issues of RPG agendas/playstyles; at least what I'm extrapolating the conversation will be given the title. Thanks for the heads up TwoSix.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Well, mostly it doesn't matter, but sometimes it does. Depends on the fight and the subsequent actions of other Characters (cf. kobold cleric with channeling).
In 1e they had the dead at -10 rule but it generally only applied to player characters... the idea of complicating things by applying those rules to mooks is pretty yuck in itself.
 

1 minute melee rounds created enough disconnect for us we felt like the characters were more puppet/pawn like it was a point of lossed immersion honestly.. and unless you are going with those longer melee rounds it looses its bite.

The mechanics are what they are. I like the shorter round times, but there is still the assumption of back and forth.

Til you got to mechanics given to the mage.. A spell casting system could have Ley Lines and environmental factors and astrological correspondence and similar things which determined availability and suitability of spell casters powers and types there of which might be available... You dont suppose it was for the sake of fun they got to choose.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. My mages can't do magic missiles to the eyes either. They get to choose which spells to attempt sure. The fighters get to choose which weapon and armor to use.
 



I just realize The One Thing And Only One Thing that I like about damage on a miss!

I don't know how it goes in 4E and Next, but in 3E, I thought it very gamist that wizards could cast spells (especially those with somatic and material components) while in melee. Sure, you have to make a concentration check, but those are easy to max out with skill points.

In kickboxing and self defense, I don't think I could chew gum while sparring. However, I could chew gum while beating up a 5 yr old (theoretically!). I don't think wizards should be chanting spells in melee, but maybe if up against a mook villager.

So rather than a rule like 'You can't cast spells in melee', I could imagine a rule like:

1) If you take any damage in melee, the spell is disrupted
2) On a miss, you do x damage to a creature that is spellcasting, stunned/dazed/prone (whichever, I can't remember all the conditions) or (if you are a fighter) x times per encounter, or whatever.
 

On the rare occasion when I call a fight (very, very rarely and only because of time constraints), I always get the feeling my players feel cheated and disappointed.

And I, as a DM, care, so I feel a little cheated myself when I do it.

Yep... pretty much this.
 

I'm not sure how you are doing your math. Intelligence does not affect damage, it does increase the DC of the save.
And since a successful save means half damage, Intelligence does in fact affect damage.

Assuming a 5th level Wizard with 16 intelligence, the DC of the save is going to be 16. A Kobold with a +1 Reflex save needs to roll a 15 or higher to make the save, which means they will make it 30% of the time.
Correct...

Assuming an average damage roll of about 16...
Whoa, stop right there. You don't get an "average damage roll." You get a damage roll, which can have results from 5 to 30, or 2 to 15 on a successful save. Those results are distributed on a bell curve. The kobold's place on the left side of that bell curve determines its odds of making it through.

I actually plotted this out with an Excel sheet (a computer is really handy for this kind of thing; instead of calculating probabilities by hand, you can just brute-force it and compute every possible result). Without getting into all the details, what it boils down to is that a failed save is essentially a death sentence. Even the toughest kobold, with the full 8 hit points, has only about a 1 in 370 chance of survival if it fails its save.

The saving throw is how tough kobolds survive. The odds of rolling 7 or less on 5d6 are miniscule, but the odds of rolling 15 or less are pretty decent--a bit over 30%. If the kobold makes the save, its chances are still nothing to write home about, but they're well above zero. So the wizard's Intelligence, by changing the odds of making the save, has a big impact on kobold survival rates.

But also, in 3e, the kobolds don't actually die until they are at -10, and in Pathfinder it is negative Constitution. A Pathfinder Kobold has 5 hps (unless you roll then it is 1d10), and an average 10 Con. So, a fireball has to deal 15 points of damage to kill them outright. In 3.5 it would be 14 hp's. If the kobolds have a cleric with them, capable of channeling energy, the average fireball may knock most of them out, and may even kill about 70% of them, but the ones that make their save are by no means out of the fight.

I'd have to go back and check to be sure, but my recollection is that according to the 3E DMG, death at zero is standard for monsters and NPCs. The negative hit point rule is meant for PCs, although the DM has the option to apply it to monsters if s/he wishes.

If the kobolds had a cleric along I might take that option, but generally I assume a monster that hits zero hit points is out of the fight and effectively dead. If players want to check for survivors and take prisoners after the battle, I'll make up something on the fly and roll to see if any kobolds are still breathing.
 
Last edited:

Looking at the title, I'm sure I'd appreciate it. Its central to some of this discussion and cuts to a lof ot the core issues of RPG agendas/playstyles; at least what I'm extrapolating the conversation will be given the title. Thanks for the heads up TwoSix.

That is a rocking interesting thread!!
 

I still think your math is wonky. The average says that kobolds should make their save 30% of the time and that more than half of all CL 5 fireballs will not be enough to kill them outright.

Also, if you take your monsters out of the fight at 0 hp, you are lessening your actions as a DM. Creatures with 0 hp are still conscious and able to take actions. You are effectively reducing all your NPCs hp by one when you do this.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top