D&D (2024) Graze on a miss questions

[James Gasik]

I think by now it's obvious- John Wick is in the process of ascending to become a God of War.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I'm actually surprised there hasn't been more discussion about this. Back during the D&D One playtest, when the topic of damage on a miss came up, there was quite a bit of uproar about how "nonsensical" such a thing would be.

I was one of those people. Now, as written, I don't have much of a problem with it, because we know HP have never been all about meat only. I know it says that in the 1e PHB explicitly, but it seems most old school gamers still play like that. Nearly everyone I played with from 1981 to 2012 (when I stopped playing 1e exclusively) treated it like that. Shrug.

Since HP aren't all meat, it can be described as taking a significant effort to avoid the blow even if it doesn't hit.

As far as capturing a fiction, it captures a pretty common battle scene in books and movies. I.e., You block the attack from killing you, but your arm goes numb from the force of the blow. Or you're spending a ton of effort to block that heavy weapon each time is smashes into your parry. We see that all the time in fiction.

 

[Rejuvenator]

Yes, but how is he taking more meat damage than he did when he was merely level one John Wick? I'd argue it was his skill turning lethal blows into survivable ones (which to me, is escalating Hit Points).

I'd think so. Like when this happened, that feels to me like John Wick having more hit points than in the first movie...

I don't think any movie can accurately capture what happens in the average D&D game, but I do see John Wick's physical resilience as a decent visual of hit point-as-meat.

I am only skeptical that "high level fighters really do grow bigger or more dense" is the best representation of hit-points-as-meat. I think it's a cool narrative that high level PCs gain a supernatural or superhuman biological upgrade, but I don't know if that's a common story in D&D.

 

[Pedantic]

We're doing the HP discussion again? I think that's pretty much always come down to what facet of the system matters more to a given player's intuition about how the world works:

1. Does getting hit involve a weapon striking your flesh?
2. How many times should a sword hit you before you die?

You're basically picking one of those points as being pegged closer to reality, and then constructing the rest of the game from there. Whichever one you prioritize as more important to your connection to the game world determines how you feel about this.

Personally, I'm in the former camp, but I don't really have a problem with Graze, precisely because it's a pretty small amount of damage. The larger the number got, the more annoying I suspect I'd find it.

 

[Reef]

I didn't mean to launch another dozen page discussion on it. I know it's been done to death, and one of those topics that no one is going to change their minds on. I just meant I think that's where the divide probably lies on the whole Damage on a Miss issue.

 

[Shardstone]

Easiest answer:

You swing with such force and wild abandon that the opponent is put into a negative position or is otherwise somehow still hurt even when avoiding the attack.

 

[Shardstone]

Damage on a miss is ace. The graze property is fun.

However, I’d rather like it to become the fighter’s schtick at a certain level, rather than be limited to certain weapons. I see it as making fighters a dependable, consistent combatant in the way that expertise makes rogues dependable, consistent infiltrators. “At level X, fighters always graze their target.”

Barbarians hit super hard but can be swingy, fighters grind you down with the attrition of superior technique.

Remember that fighters can reassign weapon masteries at higher levels!

 

[Rejuvenator]

Easiest answer:

You swing with such force and wild abandon that the opponent is put into a negative position or is otherwise somehow still hurt even when avoiding the attack.

As I referenced a couple times, this general angle is also how I imagined the designers meant to convey it.

As @Reef mentioned, maybe change it from "Graze" to something like "Deplete", and I'm halfway there... not 100%, but starting to see it more.

 

[Charlaquin]

I like the idea that these weapons are so massive that it takes extra work to block or dodge them. That you even feel it through the armour. But I wonder if the name ‘Graze’ conveys that.

Maybe something like Gruelling, or Punishing. Um…guess that doesn’t fit with the naming pattern. Tire? Weary?

Oh well, that’s why no one is asking me to write this stuff…

I think a lot of these properties are poorly named. When light hammers have “nick” and you think, “that actually fits,” you know it’s named wrong.

 

[Shardstone]

As I referenced a couple times, this general angle is also how I imagined the designers meant to convey it.

As @Reef mentioned, maybe change it from "Graze" to something like "Deplete", and I'm halfway there... not 100%, but starting to see it more.

It is also a little bit anime, and if you aren't into things like Berserk etc, I think it'll seem more "out there."