D&D 5E "Damage on a miss" poll.

[Hussar]

I think my main point got missed.

People keep talking about this loss of narrative space. But, how much are we actually talking about? How much time does a DM (or player for that matter) devote to narrating a miss? A hit, I see getting narrated pretty regularly, but a miss?

Next time you play (not DM) pay attention during combat - count the number of times the DM narrates a miss with more than, say, three words. Phrases like, "You whiff" or "Miss" or other two or three word groups aren't really narration, so, let's not count those.

My gut feeling is that misses are very rarely narrated. After all, who spends time on them? You missed, move on to the next person in initiative. Do DM's regularly spend more than a couple of words conveying a miss?

So, if DM's aren't actually narrating misses, then what's being lost here? How is "You miss" or "Whiff" really all that different from, "You nick him"? "Nickle shot"? That sort of thing. Yes, we are losing narrative space - obviously. You can't narrate a clean miss anymore with this character. But, my question still remains - who actually does this?

How much of a mountain are people making out of this molehill?

 

[The Human Target]

Everest sized.

Reaping strike to the rescue!

 

[Ahnehnois]

People keep talking about this loss of narrative space. But, how much are we actually talking about? How much time does a DM (or player for that matter) devote to narrating a miss? A hit, I see getting narrated pretty regularly, but a miss?

Sure, why not? I spend at least as much time describing a miss as a hit. It's just as important and just as dramatically interesting. Why would someone ignore it?

How much of a mountain are people making out of this molehill?

Says the guy who thinks fighters vs spellcasters is an issue?

 

[Herschel]

Yes. It's no secret Enworld ties itself - or has so far - to the most current edition.

I rather enjoy the vast majority of your posts but you need a serious reality check on this one.

 

[Herschel]

Nope.

Mechanics like these are like a virus or a cancer, they begin to spread throughout the game which would eventually cause me to change so much that I might as well build my own system.

It's often been said that the biggest problem with creating entertainment is the zealotry of some of its existing fan(atic)s. Heck, GWF isn't more powerful, nor is it the only option. If you're looking for a "virus" or a "cancer" in the game and you're looking in the mechanics then you're looking in the wrong place.

It's an option for people, numerous people, who like it. If you don't, don't use it. Let everyone have their fun.

 

[urLordy]

How much of a mountain are people making out of this molehill?

Depends. The way I see it, it's the tip of the iceberg.

(Where "tip" vs "iceberg" can refer mostly to your question about narrative space on a miss vs the totality of complaints against DoaM, although it could also been seen as the GWF mechanics and its implications about playstyles that aren't particularly comfty with it)

 

[Hussar]

Sure, why not? I spend at least as much time describing a miss as a hit. It's just as important and just as dramatically interesting. Why would someone ignore it?

Ok, fair enough. But, I did say, "Next time you play, not DM". I'm not just talking about you. I have to admit I rarely narrate a miss, beyond, "You miss" or something equally as brief. I know my current DM also does not narrate misses much beyond that either (and I can Prove it since we record our sessions).

I can't recall a DM I've ever played under who actually did do much more than that. So, I'm wondering just how widespread lengthy narration of misses is. Have I just not had DM's who do this or are we talking about a pretty small minority of DM's for whom this might actually be an issue.

Says the guy who thinks fighters vs spellcasters is an issue?

Now, now, no need to drag in your past mistakes.

 

[Hussar]

Depends. The way I see it, it's the tip of the iceberg.

How so?

Taking the 4e whipping boy - Come and Get It - we saw all sorts of criticisms about non-magical compulsion. And the same argument was put forth - this is just the tip of the iceburg, there are many powers like this. But, when you actually open up the PHB, you realize that out of about 300 powers, there are exactly 4 non-magical compulsions for martial characters, and one of those is questionable. There was no iceburg, and barely a tip.

 

[urLordy]

How so?

See my clarification above.

Taking the 4e whipping boy - Come and Get It - we saw all sorts of criticisms about non-magical compulsion. And the same argument was put forth - this is just the tip of the iceburg, there are many powers like this. But, when you actually open up the PHB, you realize that out of about 300 powers, there are exactly 4 non-magical compulsions for martial characters, and one of those is questionable. There was no iceburg, and barely a tip.

Come and Get It was nerfed, probably the appease the criticisms that you seem to be criticizing. I think Come and Get, with it's narrativist/outcome-based and the barest of appeal to sim playstyle, is a great example of a tip of an iceberg.

 

[The Human Target]

I can't reconcile my differences with anyone who has a problem with Come and Get It.