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

[Imaro]

I don't follow Twitter, but as I understand it from what others have posted, the confusion was around what damage riders are triggered, not around the basic idea of damage on a miss.

@Mistwell, are you able to clarify this?

Not Mistwell but I read the tweet. Mike Mearls was asked in general about miss damage and the arguments that have been erupting over it, with a suggestion to make damage on a miss a general feat as a sort of compromise. He replied that they would be looking at it and then further commented that he personally found it confusing with the riders for damage. So take that how you will, but the way I read it was that they are re-evaluating the mechanic as it is right now and Mearls himself has run into some issues with it concerning damage riders.

 

[billd91]

But, isn't this the entire point?

If it doesn't matter, and the GM and the players have the freedom to narrate how they like, then how is damage on a miss changing this?

As you say, the mechanics in no way actually inform the narration, therefore, you are still perfectly free to narrate damage on a miss exactly the same way. As long as it sounds good, who cares? Your massive blows force the bad guy to twist out of the way. If you kill the baddy, then you actually didn't miss. Again, so long as it sounds good, what's the problem?

As Wicht says, it removes results from the list of options - mainly failure. Particular matchups may have made failure unlikely, such as when an attack bonus was higher than the target AC before adding the d20, but for most editions it was always there. Now, for some attackers, it isn't.

 

[Mistwell]

To be honest, the way that magic has been described in D&D, there really is no impossible or "doesn't make sense" description you can place on magic. Magic has already given us the mental image of doing the impossible so it's all good. I look at magic as having lingering effects even if you make your save. If you notice though, all spells that used to requires a "to hit" roll didn't do anything if you missed.

You are incorrect. I cited one earlier in the thread. Or was it the other thread? Hard to keep track, but I definitely cited a spell that did damage on a miss and did require an attack roll.

 

[ImperatorK]

True. And no one is forcing me to play 5e either if this ability is in it. But I still don't like the ability, and I would rather it not be in 5e if WotC is going to try and sell me on 5e. So what I am arguing for is the removal of the ability before 5e goes to market because I don't like the ability, don't find it a good fit for my preferred playstyle and narrative style, don't like the mentality that leads to it, design wise, don't like the mechanics of it, don't like the interpretation of hp that says hp is mostly not health and I don't find it particularly believable.

So instead of not playing/using the thing you don't like, you prefer to piss in other peoples cornflakes. That's not a very reasonable attitude.

 

[Wicht]

You are incorrect. I cited one earlier in the thread. Or was it the other thread? Hard to keep track, but I definitely cited a spell that did damage on a miss and did require an attack roll.

A 3e spell? What was it?

 

[Imaro]

So instead of not playing/using the thing you don't like, you prefer to piss in other peoples cornflakes. That's not a very reasonable attitude.

Uhmm... isn't someone's cornflakes getting pissed in either way?

 

[Garthanos]

So instead of not playing/using the thing you don't like, you prefer to piss in other peoples cornflakes. That's not a very reasonable attitude.

That's ok when the devs say modular .. it means suck it up and house rule like they did back when I was a kid.

 

[ImperatorK]

Uhmm... isn't someone's cornflakes getting pissed in either way?

No, not really. You can simply not use that option that you don't like because you're not forced to use it.

 

[Ahnehnois]

A 3e spell? What was it?

Ice Knife. Pretty sure it's in Spell Compendium; also in one of the Complete Books.
As others have noted, it's a pretty fringe-y example that isn't all that relevant anyway.

 

[Imaro]

No, not really. You can simply not use that option that you don't like because you're not forced to use it.

Unless I am the DM I can't eliminate it from the game and me choosing not to use it does not mean it won't be used in the game I am playing in... or even used on my character by someone else.