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

[Ahnehnois]

This isn't true. My anger can abate without my choosing that it do so - it's called "calming down" as opposed to "calming oneself down". The strength of my attack can abate not because I choose to relent, but because I get tired and so my muscles stop working with the same power that they were beforehand. And that's before we even get on to examples of natural phenomena, like a storm abating.

In characterising relentlessness as an attitude, you seem to be focusing on other nuances of possible meaning, like the definition you quoted "remaining strict or determined", which has synonyms such as "dogged", "ruthless" and "single-minded". That is not the sense of "relentless" that I had in mind in characterising the great weapon fighter as such.

...

Synomys for "relentless" used in this sense include "inexorable" or "unstoppable". Neither the relentless march of time, nor the relentless march of an army of ants, nor the relentless assaults of a D&Dnext great weapon fighter, is an attitudinal phenomenon!

Semantics aside, you seem to agree with what I posted above that "unstoppable" is an apt term for what you're describing. I don't think that simply because there's a word for it means that a player should be able to create a character that is mechanically unstoppable. See my example on "omnipotent" above; just because there's a word for it doesn't make it good game design to create a character that does it.

If a player wanted a relentless fighter in 3e (or 5e), I'd simply direct them towards Toughness-type feats that give them more hit points.

You seem to think you have a better handle than the WotC designers on what falls within and without "the basic d20 paradigm".

Well, yes. The d20 system and the dictionary definitions of words like "hit" and "miss" (and roleplaying and any number of other things) are not historical traditions though.

 

[Garthanos]

Here is approximately what 6 seconds of missing look like

[video=youtube;R0ms24w_GKU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0ms24w_GKU[/video]


My character successfully saved and still died in fire... the word save and success must have been redefined somewhere.

 

[Hussar]

I think this distinction in the context of the graceful dodger narrative is pointless... in the same way that a relentless fighter can batter opponents for damage every round (regardless of how you describe it)... a graceful dodger should be able to avoid damage every round (regardless of the specifics of how it is described). With the mechanic for damage on a miss right now that is not possible. I don't want to get into a pedantic argument about the meaning of miss and hit in D&D, I want to discuss the greater point that I am putting forth.

But, your graceful dodger should have expertise dice shouldn't he? Which can be spent to reduce damage. Therefore, your graceful dodger vs the GWF would reduce the damage to zero nearly every round. So, the Graceful Dodger already has mechanics which would mitigate damage. Against an opponent with a long sword, he could use his expertise dice in other ways, but, against the relentless GWF opponent, he has to continuously dodge that honking big maul that's trying to pound him into the ground.

Seems to work for me.

 

[Nagol]

I thought expertise dice were removed from the playtest a couple of revisions back? I could have misinterpreted comments though; I am not involved in the playtest.

 

[Imaro]

I thought expertise dice were removed from the playtest a couple of revisions back? I could have misinterpreted comments though; I am not involved in the playtest.

I thought so too... I'll check my latest playtest packet though to make sure.

 

[Garthanos]

But, your graceful dodger should have expertise dice shouldn't he? Which can be spent to reduce damage. Therefore, your graceful dodger vs the GWF would reduce the damage to zero nearly every round. So, the Graceful Dodger already has mechanics which would mitigate damage. Against an opponent with a long sword, he could use his expertise dice in other ways, but, against the relentless GWF opponent, he has to continuously dodge that honking big maul that's trying to pound him into the ground.

Seems to work for me.

Special moves designed to affect and interact with special moves is indeed cool.

Relentless attack sounds like CON damage on a miss.

 

[billd91]

But, your graceful dodger should have expertise dice shouldn't he? Which can be spent to reduce damage. Therefore, your graceful dodger vs the GWF would reduce the damage to zero nearly every round. So, the Graceful Dodger already has mechanics which would mitigate damage. Against an opponent with a long sword, he could use his expertise dice in other ways, but, against the relentless GWF opponent, he has to continuously dodge that honking big maul that's trying to pound him into the ground.

Seems to work for me.

I think a more ideal situation would be to put the damage on a miss ability on something like the expertise die rather than on the defense to mitigate the offensive power that's always on.

 

[Garthanos]

Psst. It's available to three martial classes. Check the Paladin, and the Ranger. Yeah, I didn't realize that until someone else pointed it out as well. And I assume it's not a feat because feats are optional and not part of the basic game.

That has me liking it more... but I think it needs to not be tied to weapon personally.

 

[Garthanos]

I think a more ideal situation would be to put the damage on a miss ability on something like the expertise die rather than on the defense to mitigate the offensive power that's always on.

I certainly prefer tactical choices.

 

[Imaro]

Here is approximately what 6 seconds of missing look like

I'm unclear on how this video has anything to do with the discussion taking place... So are we now switching gears back to simulation, because I was addressing a narrative/genre tropes argument where the graceful dodger is a pretty prevalent narrative... or do we just go back and forth, regardless of consistency, depending on whatever supports the argument?