D&D 5E I Don't Like Damage On A Miss

[Empath Negative]

At will spells are another rule that must go.

They need to reintroduce reserve feats. Magical effects that are at will but based on your spell selection and character choices.

The problem with spellcasters isn't that they can do mindbending amazing things... it's that they can do them all the damn time. Consider "Miracle". Miracle can bend the fabric of existence... and a high level cleric can do this four times a day at level twenty... that's right. THEY CAN WARP THE FABRIC OF EXISTENCE ACROSS THE ENTIRE SPAN OF THE UNIVERSE FOUR TIMES PER DAY... and that's with 19 wisdom.

Dramatically reducing the number of spells a spellcaster has access to and instead requiring them to lean a bit more heavily on these secondary magical effects would definitely improve things.

 

[rounser]

Dragonborn are back.
"Warlords" are back.
Nonsense suspension-of-disbelief destroying gamist mechanics are back, breaking player assumptions about D&D verisimilitude.

Failing to see a clean break with 4E here.

 

[Obryn]

This is where those of us that have a problem with it come in. If the ability implies that you make more meaningful contact on a miss, then you didn't miss. If it's simply described this way, it wouldn't cause cognitive dissonance. Of course, I also dislike the idea that a character never misses at melee attacks, but that's a different argument.

But if a miss means you actually miss, then what are armor and shields doing, making it more difficult to hit you? It would seem those would, by necessity, need to be hit - as in contacted, minimally - if they are causing attacks to "miss"

You can't really dodge a fireball. But you can drop prone and let the worst of it pass over you. Now, one could argue that the reflex save is doing the job abstract Hit points are supposed to do, but hit points don't factor in nimbleness and sometimes D&D abstractions overlap.

I think this is a double standard - a post-hoc justification just because this is the way the rules have been. I find no difficulties imagining someone dodging a fireball - happens with explosions in Michael Bay movies all the darn time.

Again - my point is that it's arbitrary. You're comfortable with Miss = Miss and Save = 1/2 because that's the way it's been done and you've come up with post-hoc justifications for it.

-O

 

[Obryn]

Dragonborn are back.
"Warlords" are back.
Nonsense suspension-of-disbelief destroying gamist mechanics are back, breaking player assumptions about D&D verisimilitude.

Failing to see a clean break with 4E here.

Oh good! It's rounser!

I'm pretty sure a clean break with 4e was not promised, either. So ... your point?

-O

 

[rounser]

My point: Why bother canceling 4E and courting D&D's pre-4E audience when it's clear that 4E's trappings that drove so many away in the first place will be present and correct in "D&D Next"?

And at least there's only one of me. There's a whole contingent of you guys defending how the breaking of a fundamental D&D conceit (a miss does no damage) is justifiable and has precedent. Now that's just more of the noisome stuff we saw regarding healing surge logic, making it 4E part 2 in another respect.

 

[Deadboy]

My point: Why bother canceling 4E and courting D&D's pre-4E audience when it's clear that 4E's trappings that drove so many away in the first place will be present and correct in "D&D Next"?

And at least there's only one of me. There's a whole contingent of you guys defending how the breaking of a fundamental D&D conceit (a miss does no damage) is justifiable and has precedent. Now that's just more of the noisome stuff we saw regarding healing surge logic, making it 4E part 2 in another respect.

When have misses always equaled no damage? In older editions spells could still do damage if the targets made their save. But oh, that's magic... It's all always OK if Cause Magic. *eye roll*

EDIT: Also, what Obryn said.

 

[Obryn]

My point: Why bother canceling 4E and courting D&D's pre-4E audience when it's clear that 4E's trappings that drove so many away in the first place will be present and correct in "D&D Next"?

What posts have you been reading? All of the blog posts from WotC implied (hell, said outright) that they're aiming for a "big tent" D&D which players of all editions - yes, including 4e - could get together at one table and play.

If you're prone to irrational anger and viewing edition wars as something other than geeks on the internet arguing about the best way to pretend to be a magic elf, then this sort of inclusive policy will probably turn you off the edition.

And at least there's only one of me. There's a whole contingent of you guys defending how the breaking of a fundamental D&D conceit (a miss does no damage) is justifiable and has precedent. Now that's just more of the noisome stuff we saw regarding healing surge logic, making it 4E part 2 in another respect.

I disagree it's a fundamental D&D conceit - particularly that "fundamental" part. And I think basing your argument on one mechanic still in an alpha playtest is spurious, at best.

-O

 

[Herremann the Wise]

When have misses always equaled no damage? In older editions spells could still do damage if the targets made their save. But oh, that's magic... It's all always OK if Cause Magic. *eye roll*

You are completely incorrect in regards to 3.x/PF. What happens if a disintegrate misses, or a fireball "misses", (that is your character isn't in the blast radius)? Your character doesn't get damaged. Saves on the other hand are an attempt to minimize the effect if you do get hit or affected. This would seem pretty simple and obvious to me in terms of correctly using the terms "hit" and "miss". See below for the more complete version.

Put me down as another one who HATES a character being able to kill something by failing to do what they were trying to achieve: that is missing instead of hitting something. Damage when you miss just does not make sense. (And remember, if you are in the area of effect of a fireball, it has not missed you!!!!!) To me, the mechanics in the game should help define the result of the action, not obfuscate it. A "hit" should mean that the attack hits (even if the hit has minimal effect due to armor/toughness or whatever). A "miss" should mean that the attack misses.

My other issue with this is on a design level regarding absolutes. I don't like rules that say something always happens regardless of circumstances. There are several instances of this I would like to see removed from 5e in the next draft:
- Dwarves ALWAYS resist poison.
- Elves ALWAYS resist being charmed.
- Reapers ALWAYS deal hit point damage regardless of whether they hit or miss and thus will ALWAYS kill something with low hit points (at or below their STR mod.)

And this has nothing to do with how hit points are defined. I like hit points being defined as morale, the will to go on, divine providence, luck, toughness etc. (and in fact would prefer that that was all they meant and physical damage was treated separately but that is something for another thread). Hit points are a good abstraction that helps meld all these things together. However this should not mean that they should obfuscate whether an attack is a hit or a miss. If people want to screw around with the definition of "hit" and "miss", please find alternative words for the result of a slayers attack.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[rounser]

D&D was a big tent, it took 4E to make it small, specific and suspension-of-disbelief destroying. And now those elements are coming back for another round. How is that a big tent, when such elements manage to take the D&D out of D&D for so many? The compromise for fans of pre-4E D&D has already happened - we sat it out until it got canned. The game needs to compromise by excluding the non-D&Dish elements of 4E from the core. Keep your peanut butter out of the chocolate.

 

[ren1999]

Imagine you are 1st level and you are fighting several monsters with reaper and some roll a higher initiative. They decide to all attack you first because you are the weakest. All reapers miss you but because they do half damage you die without having the chance to roll once. You then storm out of the game to go complain on a forum about this new game.

No automatic damage or half damage unless you are helpless.