D&D 5E "Damage on a miss" poll.

[Mistwell]

In his post Wicht said "there are certain posters..." since I used they, wouldn't it make more sense to assume I was talking about those other posters... just saying.

Imaro, he named me by name...the only guy he named by name. He didn't say "other" posters, so I reasonably concluded the "certain" posters included me in that group given he was naming me. Wicht said he can see why I thought he meant me and apologized. Are you really that obtuse that you cannot see why I thought you were referring to me?

If you didn't want the answer, why ask...just saying.

 

[Imaro]

Imaro, he named me by name...the only guy he named by name. He didn't say "other" posters, so I reasonably concluded the "certain" posters included me in that group given he was naming me. Wicht said he can see why I thought he meant me and apologized. Are you really that obtuse that you cannot see why I thought you were referring to me?

If you didn't want the answer, why ask...just saying.

My problem is you assumed I was talking about you or even your post directly, ascribed motivations to me and told me what I think about you in a follow up post, got snarky with me in said post and, even after I clarified that I was not talking about you still haven't admitted you were mistaken or corrected the attitude... So honestly you're right I probably shouldn't have asked why since you didn't do me the courtesy of confirming that I was in fact addressing you or your post in any way. Figure we don't have to continue mucking up the thread with this tangent so how about we just end it here.

 

[Morrus]

Really, guys?

 

[Garthanos]

The idea that half damage on a save is somehow removing dice seems rather far-fetched.

Exactly as far fetched as some minor fighter ability that deals a very small amount of damage on a miss is removing the randomness from the game.

It's an attack that never deals no damage.. no matter what is rolled.

But the true unlikely is that imaginary "movement" towards removing dice

 

[Aenghus]

IMO what we are discussing in this thread is issues in expanding the design space for attacks to have resolutions other than just binary success or failure. Various mechanics in this vein exist for some skills and for some classes in previous editions of D&D, and different grades of success and failure already exist in these cases, such as "failure, but can try again" or "failure, but you don't fall", or critical hits.

I don't think anyone is asking for no chance of failure in the global case, and any such statement is an attempt to erect a strawman argument.

Simply put, to myself and I imagine most of those who can accept a damage on a miss mechanic, the small amount of damage on the miss is a consolation prize, not a success. A successful attack will generate more damage, typically a lot more damage, so the results are distinctly different in my eyes, and I at least would narrate them differently.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

IMO what we are discussing in this thread is issues in expanding the design space for attacks to have resolutions other than just binary success or failure. Various mechanics in this vein exist for some skills and for some classes in previous editions of D&D, and different grades of success and failure already exist in these cases, such as "failure, but can try again" or "failure, but you don't fall", or critical hits.

I don't think anyone is asking for no chance of failure in the global case, and any such statement is an attempt to erect a strawman argument.

Simply put, to myself and I imagine most of those who can accept a damage on a miss mechanic, the small amount of damage on the miss is a consolation prize, not a success. A successful attack will generate more damage, typically a lot more damage, so the results are distinctly different in my eyes, and I at least would narrate them differently.

But why does someone need a semi-reward for failing?

That would be like someone passing "go" and they collect 200 while everyone else gets 50.

 

[herrozerro]

But why does someone need a semi-reward for failing?

That would be like someone passing "go" and they collect 200 while everyone else gets 50.

Not a real good analogy, if someone passes go they have succeeded.

Anyways, there is room in the design space for more than 0% on a miss. Failure doesn't mean nothing at all is accomplished. Failure can mean that the end goal is not accomplished but progress can still be made.

 

[Paraxis]

I prefer the system a few games use where you

Fail
Fail, but....
Success
Success, and...

Translate that to a d20 system and you get something like
Natural 1 = Fail
Lower then DC = Fail, but...
Meet or beat DC = Success
Natural 20 = Success, and....

So for combat something like 13th Age
1 = no miss damage
<TN = miss damage equal to character level
>=TN = hit roll for normal damage
20 = critical hit, double damage

I don't know about the rest of you but I like that.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Anyways, there is room in the design space for 0% on a miss. Failure doesn't mean nothing at all is accomplished. Failure can mean that the end goal is not accomplished but progress can still be made.

Sure, it can. The question is should it be the case in this example. There are plenty of examples of checks where the DC is so low that failure is not possible, and plenty of actions that don't require checks (movement, for example) and thus, can't fail.

And indeed, it's possible, even given relatively "flat" math, to have a target whose AC is so low that the attacker can't miss without rolling a 1. That said, the auto-miss on a 1 is there for a reason, and it's kind of a D&D classic.

 

[Paraxis]

I prefer the system a few games use where you

Fail
Fail, but....
Success
Success, and...

Translate that to a d20 system and you get something like
Natural 1 = Fail
Lower then DC = Fail, but...
Meet or beat DC = Success
Natural 20 = Success, and....

So for combat something like 13th Age
1 = no miss damage
<TN = miss damage equal to character level
>=TN = hit roll for normal damage
20 = critical hit, double damage

I don't know about the rest of you but I like that.