Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Joe Liker" data-source="post: 6459478" data-attributes="member: 6777505">This is no more a problem for DoaM than for damage in general. My personal solution is to say that a near miss with the pertinent damage type is enough to cause extra pain if the creature is vulnerable, or require less energy/fortitude/luck to fend off if the creature is resistant.Whose expectation are we talking about here? Certainly not mine.DoaM isn't supposed to be the same as a full miss, from a narrative standpoint. It's obviously causing damage, only less than a "real" hit, so why is it such a problem to narrate it that way? It's a near miss that's not quite as "near" as most other near misses. It's a glancing blow that's even lighter than the ones the dice consider "hits." Think of DoaM as a mechanical miss that is narratively the same as a light hit, and you'll experience no more dissonance from those nasty old expectations.Why? The only reason I can think of is personal preference. It doesn't harm the game mechanically in any way. (Spells with saving throws deal the equivalent of DoaM all the time.) It doesn't even harm the game's narrative if you are willing to work with the rules instead of struggling against them. If you think there's a problem in the narration, you can always adjust the way you narrate.</blockquote>