Search results

It misses more noticeably because it was a low roll. You get to narrate why any way you want. Sometimes it might be a poorly placed strike (or series of) or sometimes it's because the lowly peasant got incredibly lucky and swatted to the ground the highly trained fighter's blade. You don't...

So why not auto-miss on a 5 or a 12? Was auto miss on a 1 picked totally arbitrarily, or because it was... intuitive? I'd argue the reason why the narrative difference between a miss on a 2 and a miss on a 15 isn't spelled out in the rules is because it seems like a no-brainer that would just...

The problem I have is that it seems a whole lot of work to insert this image that you seem to have in your head of how the game works. I'm trying to just suss out what seems natural and what makes sense with 5e rules as they've been talked about by the devs. Then I have to read paragraphs of...

"Fumble" or "auto-miss" doesn't really change my point. Hell, there's a reason a 1 has been an auto-miss. It's inherently understood to be worse. And not arbitrarily. OF course we're talking about the numbers on a die, but this is a game where nobody actually swings swords, we pretend to by...

Not even accounting for the change from 1 minute to 6 second turns already mentioned, it's just common sense: If someone rolls a 17 to hit an AC of 18 the response is usually more along the lines of"So close! You just barely missed!" No one says that if you roll a 2, and they especially don't...

What if the Great Weapon Fighter ability was changed from "damage on a miss" to "damage on a NEAR miss"? Say we have this hypothetical: A finesse weapon fighter rolls a 17 to hit an AC 18. A Great Weapon Fighter rolls a 17 to hit an AC 18. Now you could narrate the hit however you like...

That's exactly the presumption the Pixie (dodge) corner case was meant to represent. Sheadunne put it pretty well when he talked about each persons "feel" of what HP represents even if we know intellectually it means something more complex. I can live pretty well in that state...

Sounds like we're on the same page mostly then. Most agree though that with "AC," "hits," and "misses," as game terms a "miss" can mean a few things. It can mean that the armor is good enough to absorb the "hit" -hence no damage- and it can mean sometimes a miss is when the weapon doesn't...

It works for the orc (parry) example, but the problem is when the mechanic fails to work for the Pixie (dodge) situation. Change the parameters a bit to where the huge size of your weapon means you score a glancing blow to the Pixie by rolling just below AC, or miss entirely on a 1 (or 1-5...

Oh I agree with you there. Especially when we had THACO It took me a while to figure out how to add all my numbers up right, and the minute long round for one swing was very counter-intuitive. There's a whole lot of those old rules that seemed counter intuitive and were confusing to me as a kid...

Me too!

Sure, players understand "fiat tokens", but it's not exactly intuitive without explanation It's not intuitive though. It takes the explanation of what HP means. The "intuitive" grasp I came up with initially when I was 12 is "in this game reality the base assumption is that you can get hit by...

Can't XP, but I really liked Ratskinners reply to my post. I do think games like with fiat tokens and fate points and everything else do make a lot of sense to kids. And I like that it might program them to think about games differently. But D&D has always straddled the line between...

"Roll this to see if you hit and inflict regular damage" "I missed. Dang. I didn't hurt it." "Actually. You did miss, but you deal some damage anyway" "OK GREAT. I don't intuitively understand it, but I'll take the damage anyway. I want to hurt the thing." "Well, it's meant to reflect the idea...

Well, part of my whole point in posting in this thread was that I think autodamage should not be part of the core rules. Let a guy do less than a regular "hit" damage on a a role slightly missing the target AC, if "hitting" an AC means you "hit" or somehow inflict [weapon] + [mod] damage but...

You're not wrong on any of this, but when you started playing as a kid did you start with thinking about fiat tokens and 6 second (or minute) rounds when you roll a dice to attack, or did you think in your mind "I swing at the orc. [rolls]Dang, I missed"? Maybe later when you thought about...

I'm not pulling from nowhere, flubbyness through DM adjudication/ miss on a 1 was mentioned before.: I'm just trying to go with the gist of what people are saying. My point was that even IF it it still missed on a 1 that wouldn't be enough. People are advocating for leniency through dm fiat...

So you're effectively going to be hit every time, barring a fumble on a 1? That just seems like too much. It's impossible to, say... jump over a great axe swung at your feet, but only impossible if the guy is using both hands? Saying the weapon is occupying so much of a 5x5 square that a weapon...

It seems to me that the idea behind Great Weapon Fighting is that the weapon hits hard. What might not penetrate armor all the time still leaves an opponent ringing when hit with the force of a strong guy using both hands. OK. What happens when the attack just misses completely? That's why I...

Which is easier to explain to a beginning player? If we have to give a lesson on game mechanics theory, and why a miss still doing damage is some sort of "narrative token" every new kid just picking up the game should be able to explain away, then perhaps the game is too complicated...