D&D 5E House Rule: Weapons Do Something On a Miss

[billd91]

I do like the idea of effects on a miss over damage on a miss.

Same. I'd be OK with a modified version of the 13th Age escalation die. Take a d6 and use it to track misses, setting it at 1 for the first miss. Cash in the value to use as a modifier on an attack. Reset it to 0 when you cash it in.

 

[J.Quondam]

I like the idea, but agree it feels too broadly applied. I'd be inclined to limit it to specific martials features, as others have suggested.

Alternatively, these effect could be attached to Nat 1 rolls? That would add a bit of fun to the low roll, a sort of counterpart to a critical hit. Again, martial features could stretch that range out as characters progress.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Thinking of it like Weapon Conditions, it could be universally added to weapon types, or even added to weapons by a skilled blacksmith.

Dueling: On a miss, you are able to raise this weapon into a defensive position, granting +1 AC to yourself until the start of your next turn. (greatsword, longsword, short sword, rapier)

Hooked: On a miss, you are still able to entangle your opponent in the hooked blade of your weapon, reducing their AC by 1 until the start of their next turn. (hand axe, sickle, battle axe, halberd)

Thumping: On a miss, your heavy swing still knocks your opponent off balance, giving them a -1 to Dexterity Saving Throws until the start of their next turn. (club, greatclub, light hammer, warhammer)

And so on. What would be some other cool conditions?

 

[DND_Reborn]

When a combatant misses with a melee weapon attack, there is still an effect, based on the damage type.

I was going to ask why you wanted this, I mean what is wrong with a miss just being a miss?

But then you answered it:

I like the idea that on a miss, a martial character still helps out their team!

But of course this works both ways, right? I mean if a creature misses a PC, can it create these effects?

And, frankly, are your characters missing so much that you feel they still need some "happiness" out of it??? It would seem so, but I just don't see how with the design of 5E. Most tables hit about 60-70% of the time anyway.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I was going to ask why you wanted this, I mean what is wrong with a miss just being a miss?

But then you answered it:


But of course this works both ways, right? I mean if a creature misses a PC, can it create these effects?

And, frankly, are your characters missing so much that you feel they still need some "happiness" out of it??? It would seem so, but I just don't see how with the design of 5E. Most tables hit about 60-70% of the time anyway.

To be honest, I'm not really interested in discussing why I want this house rule. I'd like to focus on the rule itself.

 

[embee]

Here's an idea one of my players and I came up with:

When a combatant misses with a melee weapon attack, there is still an effect, based on the damage type.

Bludgeoning: create a 5-ft circle of rough terrain.

Piercing: Gain +1 to AC until the start of your next turn (this effect does not stack).

Slashing: Reduce the target's AC by 1 until the start of your next turn (this effect does stack).

These are just some random ideas based on the narrative of attacking with these weapons. A warhammer will crack the ground, a rapier can be raised for defense, and axe can catch an opponent's shield.

Maybe there should be more effects, not necessarily tied to damage type? For example, all axes could reduce AC, while all swords grant an AC bonus.

Some weapons could have special miss features, like a Reach weapon allowing a 5 ft. movement as a reaction on a miss.

What could be some other fun effects on a miss? And could this be applied to ranged weapons as well?

Nope nope nope.

Missing is just missing. Blows glance off of armor. Enemies dodge. Blades sometimes swing wide. There shouldn't be a reward for not hitting, just like there shouldn't be a penalty for missing or botching.

Also, those examples, honestly, make little sense. A warhammer doesn't explode a 5' stone floor into rubble (making it difficult terrain). A dagger that is stopped by mail doesn't somehow now make the wielder harder to hit. Splint armor struck by sabre isn't slashed for 6 seconds, only to mend itself.

If the PCs aren't able to hit the monsters, then they should take that as a cue that they are outmatched. Not fighting is always an option.

 

[DND_Reborn]

To be honest, I'm not really interested in discussing why I want this house rule. I'd like to focus on the rule itself.

Fair enough. It isn't anything I would do, but more power to you. I hope you get some good feedback and find something that works for your table. Cheers!

EDIT: to avoid other similar responses as mine, you might want to make this a "(+)" thread in the title.

EDIT AGAIN: Does this work both ways? Will these effects happen to PCs? Just curious...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And, frankly, are your characters missing so much that you feel they still need some "happiness" out of it??? It would seem so, but I just don't see how with the design of 5E. Most tables hit about 60-70% of the time anyway.

The way 5E does things, for martial characters, particularly at levels 1-4, it can certainly feel pretty damn rubbish when you get 2-3 rounds of "lol whiff" and there's literally nothing else you can do because of the action economy, and you having to decide to expend your main action before you know if you hit/miss.

So playing at lower levels this is particularly likely to be an issue.

Either way, I don't like the proposed approach because it means adding a whole lot of small modifiers to various stats.

Are people really going to remember all the "Oh this enemy has -1 to that and I have +1 to this" and so on? Especially given the limited duration of each effect. Double-especially if the monsters (often more numerous than the PCs) are also doing these effects.

I think what might work a little better is if you had:

A) A pool of points or whatever that you could spend on a miss (and maybe you build it up by missing and it resets on a long rest?)

(Edit: If built up by missing, I'd only give one if all your attacks in a round missed, btw.)

and

B) You could spend those points to cause effects which make sense on a miss, and are a bit more dramatic and inline with how 5E does things than -1/+1 modifiers. Like Spend 1 "Whiff Point" to inflict Stat Mod damage on the enemy anyway, or spend 2 "Whiff Points" to inflict Disadvantage on their attack rolls for a round because they're trying to get out of the way, or whatever. Or you spend 2 before rolling your attack for "Warrior's Intuition", and then roll your attack - if it hits, you spent the points, and everything happens as normal, but if it misses, your intuition allows you to choose another course, so you can do anything which isn't an attack.

 

[DND_Reborn]

So playing at lower levels this is particularly likely to be an issue.

That hasn't been my experience given typical attack bonuses and ACs, but of course everyone's experience is different.

Are people really going to remember all the "Oh this enemy has -1 to that and I have +1 to this" and so on? Especially given the limited duration of each effect. Double-especially if the monsters (often more numerous than the PCs) are also doing these effects.

This was my initial reaction as well.

Another idea would be increasing attacks after misses. So, if you miss a target, you gain a +2 bonus on your next attack. You miss again, it increases to +4, and so on. This might represent the idea that your misses are teaching you something about your opponent's defenses, etc. and you next attack is more likely to hit because of what you have learned.

if missing a lot is really an issue, this would help alleviate it some IMO and I don't think would be hard to track.

But that might not really be the direction the OP wants to go.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

That hasn't been my experience given typical attack bonuses and ACs, but of course everyone's experience is different.

I don't mean "It is usually an issue for all martial characters at L1-4"

I mean "once you have two attacks this happens a lot less".