D&D 5E "Damage on a miss" poll.

Do you find the mechanic believable enough to keep?

  • I find the mechanic believable so keep it.

    Votes: 106 39.8%
  • I don't find the mechanic believable so scrap it.

    Votes: 121 45.5%
  • I don't care either way.

    Votes: 39 14.7%

Status
Not open for further replies.

ForeverSlayer

Banned
Banned
This Gunslinger example is interesting and a bit surprising - people are happy to play PF and just ignore this ability if they don't like it, but can't do the same with D&Dnext?

Yes, I would be less likely to pick up an edition that doesn't include the options that will let me build and play the sorts of characters I am interested in (whether as player or GM).



All these complaints are framed within a presupposition - namely, of a type of process simulation in mechanics - that I (and, I suspect, some others who don't object to DoaM - such as @Hussar and @TwoSix , based on their posts upthread) do not accept.

GWF does not represent training or skill. It occupies something like the same space as the barbarian's rage - it expresses fierceness, determination, resolution, inevitability.

And the fact that the mechanical resolution of a successful attack roll is not affected by the ability does not mean that that fiereceness, determination, resolution and inevitability cannot be incorporated into the narration of a hit. In fact, I would expect such incorporation to be fairly typical.

Because that ability isn't built into the Gunslinger and there are plenty of alternative abilities that replace it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

ForeverSlayer

Banned
Banned
This Gunslinger example is interesting and a bit surprising - people are happy to play PF and just ignore this ability if they don't like it, but can't do the same with D&Dnext?

Yes, I would be less likely to pick up an edition that doesn't include the options that will let me build and play the sorts of characters I am interested in (whether as player or GM).



All these complaints are framed within a presupposition - namely, of a type of process simulation in mechanics - that I (and, I suspect, some others who don't object to DoaM - such as @Hussar and @TwoSix , based on their posts upthread) do not accept.

GWF does not represent training or skill. It occupies something like the same space as the barbarian's rage - it expresses fierceness, determination, resolution, inevitability.

And the fact that the mechanical resolution of a successful attack roll is not affected by the ability does not mean that that fiereceness, determination, resolution and inevitability cannot be incorporated into the narration of a hit. In fact, I would expect such incorporation to be fairly typical.

Because that ability isn't built into the Gunslinger and there are plenty of alternative abilities that replace it.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
It's implausible because I can't see any justification for explaining what special training would have this effect and only this effect. Are we to assume that even a 20th level fighter with boatloads of other skills deals no damage every time he misses, regardless of the strength of the target (an outcome that occurs at least 5% of the time in all cases), but that a fighter of modest overall skill but one special ability never, ever has this happen? What kind of education could possibly produce such a far-reaching outcome, one that overrides the notion that skill in causing damage is represented by the attack bonus?

You're WAY overthinking it. You're looking for a level of plausible detail that isn't achieved by almost anything in this game, due to the abstract nature of so many of the mechanics. Is it perfect? No of course not, none of the mechanics are in this abstract sort of game. But is it good enough? Sure, at least for me and some others. It doesn't seem any less plausible than so many other mechanics which I have not seen you complain about over the years.
 

pemerton

Legend
Because that ability isn't built into the Gunslinger and there are plenty of alternative abilities that replace it.
Hmm - much like GWF, which isn't built into the paladin, ranger or fighter and has alternative abilities to replace it - two in the playtest, and presumably more than that over the lifetime of the game.

a character with this ability is no fiercer or more determined when he is hitting someone than a character without this ability is.
How do you know? Maybe that determination explains why s/he hit?

Nothing in the d20 roll or the damage roll mandates or entails any particular explanation of what caused the hit and damage - it could be luck, skill, resolution, something else, in any mix that the particpants choose to narrate or imagine.
 

Imaro

Legend
I wouldn't. No offense to anyone that feels so strong about this one ability that they won't even try 5ed, but personally I'm not a person that takes his toys and goes home angry because I didn't like one thing about a game. And unlike Imaro, I don't get upset when other people like something I don't like.

Dude, seriously?? What are you talking about? I am advocating and discussing what I think about the mechanic like everyone else in the thread (including you). I must've missed the posts where you asked me how I felt about other people liking different things from what I like... and I said it made me angry. Wait a minute, I didn't tell you anything about the way I feel about other people and their differing likes... so how about you chill with ascribing motivations to me that you decided to pull out of thin air?
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
A quick question, for those that like damage on a miss as a constant ability: If the designers removed this feature from the game would you be less likely to pick up the edition?

Nope. But honestly, if people cannot stand this so much that the mere presence of it in the rules, possibly used by a player other than them at the same table, is so objectionable that they don't want to play - then I think it's possible I don't want them playing it anyway. In that way it could serve as an excellent filter to screen out people who I think are just poison for the game - the kinds of people who drive new players away with their onetruwayism and their insistence that others mirror their preferences. And I doubt this mechanic would be the only thing that brings that out in those people - it's just the most obvious so far.

Now I don't know that to be the case for sure - it's just a suspicion, which could be wrong. But I definitely see a difference between "People who object to this, so they just won't use it" and "People who object to this, and they won't even play the game if it's possible someone else might use this". The later, I think, are likely trouble.
 

Ahnehnois

First Post
How do you know? Maybe that determination explains why s/he hit?

Nothing in the d20 roll or the damage roll mandates or entails any particular explanation of what caused the hit and damage - it could be luck, skill, resolution, something else, in any mix that the particpants choose to narrate or imagine.
Yes, but the character's determination in general is not at issue. Only whatever portion of his determination (or skill, or any quality) is attributable to GWF. Whatever boost to determination (or whatever else) GWF provides, it does not affect the character's chance of hitting, or the outcome when he does. Only when he misses does this particular quantum of determination come in to play. That's some strange determination.
 

pemerton

Legend
Yes, but the character's determination in general is not at issue. Only whatever portion of his determination (or skill, or any quality) is attributable to GWF. Whatever boost to determination (or whatever else) GWF provides, it does not affect the character's chance of hitting, or the outcome when he does.
After I've said that I'm not framing this in a process simulation way, I don't understand why you keep reiterating process sim reasoning to explain why it doesn't work.

The character with GWF is relentless. GWF is a game element; the character's relentlessness is an in-fiction phenomenon. GWF doesn't cause the relentlessness, and is not a "boost to determination; it expresses the character's determination in mechanical terms.

In-fiction, how do we see that the character is relentless? Because those who s/he engages are always worn down by 6 seconds of fighting, whatever else might happen. Mechanically how do we express this? Via damage on a miss.

Only when he misses does this particular quantum of determination come in to play. That's some strange determination.
There is no "quantum of determination" that can be parcelled out over hits and misses, and that comes into play only when the player rolls a miss on the d20. There is a character who is determined (relentless), and who therefore inevitably wears down his/her foes. And the mechanics express this, because indeed the PC's foes are always worn down to some extent after 6 seconds of being engaged.

In the fiction, there is no necessary difference between a round in which the player rolls a miss and does STR damage, or in which the player rolls a hit and does W + STR damage - the details of the narration (ie the fictional content) are utterly dependent upon context - who took damage, what proportion of their hp did it wear away, did it drop them to 0 or below, etc.
 

ImperatorK

First Post
Dude, seriously?? What are you talking about? I am advocating and discussing what I think about the mechanic like everyone else in the thread (including you). I must've missed the posts where you asked me how I felt about other people liking different things from what I like... and I said it made me angry. Wait a minute, I didn't tell you anything about the way I feel about other people and their differing likes... so how about you chill with ascribing motivations to me that you decided to pull out of thin air?
Well, firstly, I didn't say you said you're "angry", so that's a strawman.
Secondly, let me refresh your memory:
So instead of not playing/using the thing you don't like, you prefer to piss in other peoples cornflakes. That's not a very reasonable attitude.
Uhmm... isn't someone's cornflakes getting pissed in either way?
No, not really. You can simply not use that option that you don't like because you're not forced to use it.
Unless I am the DM I can't eliminate it from the game and me choosing not to use it does not mean it won't be used in the game I am playing in... or even used on my character by someone else.
If the last post doesn't mean you get upset (not angry, upset) because other players are using something you don't like, then what exactly does it mean?

Re: Relentlessness
It can be portrayed by the 5ed equivalent of Power Attack.
 
Last edited:

Imaro

Legend
Well, firstly, I didn't say you said you're "angry", so that's a strawman.
Secondly, let me refresh your memory:

If the last post doesn't mean you get upset (not angry, upset) because other players are using something you don't like, then what exactly does it mean?

The last post is a simple statement of fact, showing that even if one chooses not to use the damage-on-a-miss mechanic it can still have an effect on them in play (by being used on them by another player , a monster, etc.)and thus is still "pissing in their corn flakes". Again, you want to know how I feel about something ask me, don't ascribe motives to a post speaking in the hypothetical.

OAN: Angry is close enough to "being upset" so let's not play word games.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top