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

[Garthanos]

Weasel words by the way - a certain Clinton quote came to mind .... depends on how you define sex.

 

[Garthanos]

Success doesn't necessarily mean getting what you want.

Failure doesn't necessarily mean you completely accomplish zero either.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Attacks and defenses are just the same coin you cant really make one semi- and then pretend the other can't be that is playing head games.

It's debatable as to whether offense and defense are equivalent. However, targeted attacks and area effects are not two sides of the same coin. One is a coin and one is a bill.

The real difference is one is martial the other mage, and martial types cant have nice things.

As many have noted, the ability in question is underpowered and hardly qualifies as a "nice thing".

Weasel words by the way - a certain Clinton quote came to mind .... depends on how you define sex.

Failure doesn't necessarily mean you completely accomplish zero either.

I'll just let you argue with yourself there.

 

[Garthanos]

As many have noted, the ability in question is underpowered and hardly qualifies as a "nice thing".

The ability needs to be made nicer... doesnt make it not nice - for some people reliable minimum impact for an action choice is very much a nice thing.

 

[Garthanos]

However, targeted attacks and area effects are not two sides of the same coin.

Not all damage on a save attacks are area of effects... the general meaning could easily be seen as a hard to avoid effect. (requiring a special ability like damage resistance or specialty save) to protect from.

 

[TwoSix]

I think this is also relevant to damage on a miss. In many systems a player has to make a successful die roll to wear down an opponent of his/her PC. But there is no in-principle reason why this can't be made into the domain of player fiat, just like a Sleep spell. (Or say Cure Wounds spells compared to healing checks. Or Invisibiity compared to stealth checks.)

More and more, I'm beginning to feel like this is a question of whether the attack roll is a statement of task or a statement of intent. (And I think I linked the relevant thread from RPG.net in the now-locked thread, but I'm not positive.)

For the anti-DoaMers, the attack roll is a task. The fighter is swinging a sword, and the d20 roll models how well the fighter actually does at swinging the sword. A low roll is a failure of either his muscle memory or his mental focus, or possibly a environmental issue interrupting said action (like slipping in mud, or a sudden inhalation of dust).

For the pro-DoaMers, the attack roll is a statement of intent. "The fighter is going to try to defeat that enemy with melee combat." The actual physical action that realizes (or fails to realize) that intent is a narration. I think 13th Age, as an example, demonstrates its strong intent-declaration aims with flexible melee attacks. You announce your intention to harm the enemy, and the dice roll determines the form of the action that actually occurs, with the added nuance that the action determined by roll can cause different mechanical effects.

 

[Garthanos]

survival may or may not be a possible outcome

If my enemy is down to near nothing in hit points I want survival against my fighter's attack to be NOT a possible outcome.

Yes I want it to scale better and yes I want it available for other weapons and I want it to be a tactical choice.

But I definitely want this and many other options.

 

[Ahnehnois]

If my enemy is down to near nothing in hit points I want survival against my fighter's attack to be NOT a possible outcome.

Well, barring the argument that this isn't necessarily a reasonable request, wouldn't you rather just have the ability to take 10 on an attack roll or sweep through an area and deal area damage? You not only have to get this outcome, you have to take a dump on the hit/miss paradigm in the process?

 

[urLordy]

For the anti-DoaMers, the attack roll is a task. The fighter is swinging a sword, and the d20 roll models how well the fighter actually does at swinging the sword. A low roll is a failure of either his muscle memory or his mental focus, or possibly a environmental issue interrupting said action (like slipping in mud, or a sudden inhalation of dust).

For me, I agree with the clarification (or quibble) that the die roll abstracts a little wider than the fighter's personal momentary failure or environmental issues like slipping in mud. It represents all external circumstances, including the opponent just happening to move rightly or wrongly at that moment. The die roll abstracts all uncertainty and chaos, all agency beyond the fighter's control. It is destiny or cruel lady luck.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Failure doesn't necessarily mean you completely accomplish zero either.

This actually made me bust a gut laughing.