• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E "Damage on a miss" poll.

Do you find the mechanic believable enough to keep?

  • I find the mechanic believable so keep it.

    Votes: 106 39.8%
  • I don't find the mechanic believable so scrap it.

    Votes: 121 45.5%
  • I don't care either way.

    Votes: 39 14.7%

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

Its not in the SRD. Appears to have been in Spell Compendium, Tome and Blood, and Oriental Adventures. I must have read it in Tome and Blood, but don't remember it. Some weird mechanics with that spell.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Some weird mechanics with that spell.
Yeah. It does cold Dexterity damage too, which is blocked by cold immunity but never affected by any amount of cold resistance. It's a strangely written spell. Can't think of any other damage on a miss spells like it, but then again, spells aren't what we're talking about anyway.
 

ICE KNIFE
Conjuration (Creation) [Cold]
Level: Assassin 2, sorcerer/wizard 2
Components: S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Effect: One icy missile
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial or
Refl ex half; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes

You must succeed on a normal ranged
attack to hit (with a +2 bonus on the
attack roll for every two caster
levels). If it hits, an ice knife deals
2d8 points of cold damage and
2 points of Dexterity damage (a
successful Fortitude save negates the
Dexterity damage). Creatures that have
immunity to cold also take no Dexterity
damage automatically.
A knife that misses creates a
shower of ice crystals in a 10-
foot-radius burst (see Missing
with a Thrown Weapon, PH
158, to determine where the shard
hits). The icy burst deals 1d8 points
of cold damage to all creatures within
the area (Refl ex half).
Material Component: A drop of water
or piece of ice

It still hits something because it becomes an area of effect type spell when it explodes. If it didn't explode then it wouldn't do any damage on a miss.

There are no direct spells that do damage on a miss if it has a "to hit" roll and does not explode.
 


This is a tangent from the topic of the thread, but I am not sure I would use Ice Knife as any sort of precedent for anything. It seems to me that it would be a better spell if it was either a ranged touch or an area of effect. That is, a spell that you could, when casting, choose to use as one or the other. The explode on a miss seems like a bad mechanic to me, just rubs me a bit wrong. The +2 bonus on the attack roll for every 2 caster levels is wonky (does it or does it not include BAB; I think its a not, but the wording is poor). It also seems to me like it should be a medium ranged spell, but that's a minor nit. And Ahn's point about the Dexterity effect is spot on - Seems like cold resistance should negate that as well.

EDIT: Another bit of wonkiness is the referral to the missed thrown weapons rule, but when you miss with a thrown weapon, it lands a number of spaces equal to the range increment, but there are no range increments with this spell.
 
Last edited:

[MENTION=91812]ForeverSlayer[/MENTION]
Yeah, it's basically a grenade-like piece of ice. Not the same as someone swinging a two-handed weapon.
 

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.

When someone says "There is no 3e spell that does X", and I name a 3e spell that does X, it's relevant. If you think it's not, then I guess we have to get into your definition of relevant.

And, as expected, once I replied, ForeverSlayer moved the goal posts to "and does not explode". Which has nothing at all to do with the initial point he was making (we all get that you think of Area Attack spells as different, but his point did not have anything to do with that difference).
 
Last edited:

@ForeverSlayer
Yeah, it's basically a grenade-like piece of ice. Not the same as someone swinging a two-handed weapon.

That's exactly what it is.

This is actually a great example of how 3e screwed up spells.

From the 2e wizards handbook.

"This spell fires a dagger of ice at the target. The caster makes a normal attack roll as if attacking with a missile weapon, factoring in the range from the attacker to the target (the ice knife has a long range of 30 yards, a medium range of 20 yards, and a short range of 10 yards). A successful hit causes 2-8 (2d4) hit points of damage. If the ice knife misses its target, consult the rules for grenade-like missiles on pages 62-63 of the Dungeon Master's Guide to determine where it lands.

When an ice knife strikes a solid object or a creature, the knife shatters, releasing a wave of numbing cold. All creatures within a 5-foot radius must make a successful saving throw vs. paralyzation or suffer 1-4 hit points of cold damage and become numb for 1-3 rounds. Numbed creatures have their movement rates reduced by half and their chance to hit reduced by 2. Proximity to major sources of heat, such as a roaring bonfire, improves a creature's saving throw by +2.


An ice knife that misses or is lost cannot be picked up by the caster (or anyone else) and thrown again. If the ice knife is touched, it instantly shatters, releasing a wave of cold as described above. If a lost ice knife is not touched, it melts away in a pool of water 1 round after it was originally created; this melting occurs regardless of the environmental temperature.


The material components for this spell are a drop of water from melted snow and a tiny silver dagger.



"
 
Last edited:

[MENTION=91812]ForeverSlayer[/MENTION]
Yeah, it's basically a grenade-like piece of ice. Not the same as someone swinging a two-handed weapon.

Sigh, nobody said it was the same. ForeverSlayer said "all spells that used to requires a "to hit" roll didn't do anything if you missed." The statement was incorrect. You've claimed to be a person who values accuracy highly, up until now. Why are you suddenly discounting accuracy?
 

From the 2e wizards handbook."

I don't know that I would agree that 3e messed up all the spells, but the 2e spell does make better thematic sense, as it explodes whether or not it strikes.

Mistwell said:
Sigh, nobody said it was the same. ForeverSlayer said "all spells that used to requires a "to hit" roll didn't do anything if you missed." The statement was incorrect. You've claimed to be a person who values accuracy highly, up until now. Why are you suddenly discounting accuracy?

While I wouldn't be so bold as to say there are "no spells" that break the paradigm (especially when one brings in 3pp spells), but in fairness, it is a pretty good rule of thumb that spells requiring a roll don't do area effects. And you did have to bring in a non-OGL spell to prove your point.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top