Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Damage on a Miss: Because otherwise Armour Class makes no sense
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6271673" data-attributes="member: 27160"><p>First, a note: I think there are many and various answers to [MENTION=13107]tomBitonti[/MENTION]'s questions, all of which are valid. I'm just going to give ones that occur immediately to me, by way of illustration.</p><p></p><p></p><p>STR bonus seems to me a good basis. Reason? One of several would be that there is absolutely no reason for a melee attack to culminate in either a hit with the weapon originally used to strike or a clear miss. Fechbuchs and illustrations clearly show that pommel/butt strikes, punches, arm locks, leg hooks, axe-like blows with the quillions, kicks, knees and headbutts could all be the outcome of an attack with a longsword (bastard sword, in D&D parlance). To restrict the possible outcomes to "cut with blade or miss" is just bizarre.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Because only fighters train in the full, martial arts techniques that use medieval weapons to their fullest potential, maybe? This could actually form a fine basis for fighters having the ability to do damage if <em>their opponent</em> misses, too, actually. There are several techniques that can convert a response to an attack directly into an arm lock (read "break") or a strike with the attacker's own weapon against a poorly trained target.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If we are talking about a melee attack - which is what is suggested for DDN - then the target will be aware of the attack after it happens, whether they were aware of it beforehand or not! The only way an attack on an unaware target will fail is through luck - they turn or move at just the crucial moment, or a piece of armour deflects the incoming weapon - and there will be a "clash of bodies" regardless.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Cover and concealment don't work the same way in close combat as they do for missiles. No-one stabs into a brick wall instead of an enemy by accident. What they do is restrict the combatants' options - but they also add new options to a skilled fighter, such as crushing/bashing the enemy against the wall, or flicking a branch into the enemy's face.</p><p></p><p>What you need to account for is that a trained fighter is not just trying to strike their enemy with their weapon - they are trying to disable the enemy with anything, and by any means, that they can do so. An important concept in close combat is to control your opponent's weapon. If that weapon is only their sword, this is a lot easier than if their weapon is their whole body and aspects of the fighting environment, so fighting with your whole body has clear advantages.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, in the examples I gave, easy - you are not striking with the blade, so poison or flame don't figure into the situation. The mirror image likely doesn't, either, since the "miss damage" will not be coming from the initial movement in the exchange, so it will be guided as much by touch as by sight. If you watch swordsmen fight, you will see that they often keep their blades (or shields) "bound" (touching). This is because you get a much better feedback of what your opponent intends to do next that way. Of course, this is mutual - but if you are a better fighter it's a net advantage.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 6271673, member: 27160"] First, a note: I think there are many and various answers to [MENTION=13107]tomBitonti[/MENTION]'s questions, all of which are valid. I'm just going to give ones that occur immediately to me, by way of illustration. STR bonus seems to me a good basis. Reason? One of several would be that there is absolutely no reason for a melee attack to culminate in either a hit with the weapon originally used to strike or a clear miss. Fechbuchs and illustrations clearly show that pommel/butt strikes, punches, arm locks, leg hooks, axe-like blows with the quillions, kicks, knees and headbutts could all be the outcome of an attack with a longsword (bastard sword, in D&D parlance). To restrict the possible outcomes to "cut with blade or miss" is just bizarre. Because only fighters train in the full, martial arts techniques that use medieval weapons to their fullest potential, maybe? This could actually form a fine basis for fighters having the ability to do damage if [i]their opponent[/i] misses, too, actually. There are several techniques that can convert a response to an attack directly into an arm lock (read "break") or a strike with the attacker's own weapon against a poorly trained target. If we are talking about a melee attack - which is what is suggested for DDN - then the target will be aware of the attack after it happens, whether they were aware of it beforehand or not! The only way an attack on an unaware target will fail is through luck - they turn or move at just the crucial moment, or a piece of armour deflects the incoming weapon - and there will be a "clash of bodies" regardless. Cover and concealment don't work the same way in close combat as they do for missiles. No-one stabs into a brick wall instead of an enemy by accident. What they do is restrict the combatants' options - but they also add new options to a skilled fighter, such as crushing/bashing the enemy against the wall, or flicking a branch into the enemy's face. What you need to account for is that a trained fighter is not just trying to strike their enemy with their weapon - they are trying to disable the enemy with anything, and by any means, that they can do so. An important concept in close combat is to control your opponent's weapon. If that weapon is only their sword, this is a lot easier than if their weapon is their whole body and aspects of the fighting environment, so fighting with your whole body has clear advantages. Well, in the examples I gave, easy - you are not striking with the blade, so poison or flame don't figure into the situation. The mirror image likely doesn't, either, since the "miss damage" will not be coming from the initial movement in the exchange, so it will be guided as much by touch as by sight. If you watch swordsmen fight, you will see that they often keep their blades (or shields) "bound" (touching). This is because you get a much better feedback of what your opponent intends to do next that way. Of course, this is mutual - but if you are a better fighter it's a net advantage. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Damage on a Miss: Because otherwise Armour Class makes no sense
Top