D&D 5E What rule(s) is 5e missing?

[James Gasik]

I wasn't here either, but I saw many threads like that during the playtest, yes. Basically people who didn't play 4e acted as if damage on a miss was the most ridiculous, nonsensical thing ever.

But you know, save for half damage is perfectly fine. : )

 

[Aldarc]

Didn't they already try that with Damage Oo a Miss?

That's not what fail forward means. If that were the case, then spellcasters have been fail-forwarding their way through many of their damage spells (e.g., save for half-damage).

 

[DND_Reborn]

Didn't they already try that with Damage Oo a Miss?

Yes, but a lot of people hate the idea as if attack rolls, AC, and hit points aren't already highly ambiguous.

Or just get rid of the attack roll, as it is virtually pointless anyway.

D&D 5E - Removing Attack Rolls -- and maybe more? (Game Design / Theory Discussion)

Reviewing articles on Bounded Accuracy made me question how well it was working given its purpose in the design of 5E but also made me think about pushing it further in some respects. I find it interesting that this was considered a solution to the treadmill effect of attack bonuses and AC...

www.enworld.org

 

[Tallifer]

Rules for various anatomical measurements (think Fatal RPG... well, maybe don't think about it)

 

[billd91]

I wasn't here either, but I saw many threads like that during the playtest, yes. Basically people who didn't play 4e acted as if damage on a miss was the most ridiculous, nonsensical thing ever.

But you know, save for half damage is perfectly fine. : )

Different things. And there were some of who did play 4e who thought damage on a miss was problematic for weapons.

 

[glass]

Different things

They really aren't. Half damage on a successful save it literally just damage on a miss with someone else rolling the dice.

_
glass.

 

[billd91]

They really aren't. Half damage on a successful save it literally just damage on a miss with someone else rolling the dice.

_
glass.

Mechanically, yes. Conceptually, no.

 

[Minigiant]

With the conversation on Bloodied, I think other conditions are missing

Sickened
Dazed
Dazzled
Confused

 

[Lanefan]

That's not what fail forward means. If that were the case, then spellcasters have been fail-forwarding their way through many of their damage spells (e.g., save for half-damage).

Save-for-half-damage still means the spell hit you, though; and that's the difference here.

 

[Aldarc]

Save-for-half-damage still means the spell hit you, though; and that's the difference here.

And it's not "fail forward" in either case.