Search results

When he has a valid target within reach? Never. Well unless you count instances of hitting DR or other effects that would reduce damage. But that's what it is simulating, a fighter who's weapon style is so relentless/wild/unpredictable/overbearing that you take damage unless you get the hell...

Well when he "misses" he deals damage less than the worst damage roll possible when he hits, so there is that. Also, unless you take "hit" to mean contact and "miss" to mean no contact, there is no actual standard of contact being made. My example wording above handles this well. If you...

The mechanic is not removed. I don't see this one character suddenly removing misses from the game. And I feel that the wording could be improved. Making it vague like "Your relentless onslaught always causes your foe harm, either from your weapon or from trying to get out of the way." Also...

A simulation just simulates what you want. This particular mechanic can be a quicker simulation of other mechanics such as hitting touch AC, Missing by X amount or even just the abstract nature of HP. A simulation can be as granular or abstract as one wants. Obviously this may have issues...

In any of the specific GNS silos, it can function. I guess I do concede that playstyle as an ascetic choice, yes it can cause issues. But from a narritivist, simulationist or gamist perspective alone, it is no worse than any other mechanic.

on the contrary, it seems to be a mechanic that can be accepted by all playstyles, just not by some of the people in certain playstyles. Edit: And by playstyles I mean GNS.

It makes sense when you divorce HP from meat. When HP represents everything from meat to the will to keep fighting, the HP recovery in 4e makes sense.

You mean 4e and 5e. 5e damage works the same way with no difference between subdual and lethal damage. So it is quite easy.

Yes, this can happen. But it can also happen if you pit them against a bunch of mages with magic missile, the mages could do it at range as well. just because a mechanic can be abused by the DM doesn't make it bad.

So you are saying that you never overrule any other players ever? Because unless you are fine with all other mechanics all the time, this happens to other players and mechanics all the time.

Actually this is on topic, this thread isnt about Great Weapon fighting, It's about Damage on a miss mechanic. Which some spells do have.

Ooooo... So since spells never actually "hit" anything, they just effect things that do not save. we shouldn't be using them for hit point damage?

I don't know what you are talking about here. What I am saying is that any media representation of a field. Books, Movies, TV, Video games and even pen and paper RPGs. All of these suffer from the issue I mentioned earlier.

I didn't think I was speaking for myself, but rather just pointing out the issues in any media with pretty much any kind of accurate portrayal of a field.

This is an issue with any kind of media. The layperson has no true understanding of how a subject works and has expectations that the actual expert scoffs at. Take almost any medical show, Doctors will probably roll their eyes. A computer programmer will probably groan at the hackers...

I thought I just did. I was unsure what you were getting at so I asked the question.

Does it have to be one or the other?

No, you asserted that removing the dice from the equation makes the game lame. Spells fall right into that category. If a creature has less than the minimum damage on a miss of a spell (not just aoe mind you) then there is no need to roll any dice. Making the game lame as you put it.

So lets remove half damage on a save spells as well. it's the exact same problem. If a monster is low enough a wizard just has to say "I cast X spell. Half damage is more than the monsters HP so it's dead."

True, so this poll really has no reason for existing.