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

[Empath Negative]

Guardian-type Fighter misses a player: "He swings his sword at you, and you parry deftly. Take no damage."

Slayer-type Fighter misses a player: "He swings his sword at you, and you parry deftly - but you still really feel the blow in your arms. Take 3 points of damage."

There's no descriptive problem here.

But what you don't seem to be getting is that you'll be saying that EVERY SINGLE MISS... every single miss against the Ancient Chromatic Dragon the 1st lvl reaper manages to wreck the Ancient Red Dragon for 3 points of damage.

And since some guy threw a &$#% fit when I assumed we'd have DR and untyped damage in fifth edition, I'll go ahead and assume we don't this time around and so yeah... an army of first level reapers all whiff hardcore against the ancient red dragon, and bring him down in a single round.

I guess the gods best be soiling themselves right now.

 

[Empath Negative]

This got me thinking... if you're a low level NPC.. why EVER be anything other than a reaper? If you have a positive STR score... a small horde of kobolds with 14 str (not entirely unheard of for fighting)could tear down just about anything of equal and low level, if they're all reapers.

If I have to have footmen, why not make every single last one of them reapers? That way they all autokill commoners, kobolds, goblins, whatever? And god help the low level party facing them.

 

[Quickleaf]

I get why people like the mechanic, or don't see any problems with it when it comes to description or the narrative it produces. I feel like it's been asked a few times, but maybe it hasn't been clear. What, exactly, makes it so good that it shouldn't be replaced by an ability that more people would find acceptable?

A few people have mentioned advantage on your next attack if you miss. I could see disadvantage on a miss, too. Maybe advantage on your next attack within a round if you drop an opponent. Something. I'm just curious what's so great about the current ability that it's worth keeping over changing to something that more people will be on board with. Anyone? As always, play what you like

Oh, there are lots of ways to go about it...

An auto-damage aura against lower level/lower HP or HD enemies that can be activated when a fighter wields a two-handed weapon could work too.

Actually something like the 1e fighter rules about higher level fighters auto-killing low HD enemies could also work.

 

[herrozerro]

But what you don't seem to be getting is that you'll be saying that EVERY SINGLE MISS... every single miss against the Ancient Chromatic Dragon the 1st lvl reaper manages to wreck the Ancient Red Dragon for 3 points of damage.

And since some guy threw a &$#% fit when I assumed we'd have DR and untyped damage in fifth edition, I'll go ahead and assume we don't this time around and so yeah... an army of first level reapers all whiff hardcore against the ancient red dragon, and bring him down in a single round.

I guess the gods best be soiling themselves right now.

I wouldnt call 3 damage wrecking. I wouldsay that all you would need is an army of 1st level apprentice wizards and you'd do better btw.

 

[Stormonu]

Actually something like the 1e fighter rules about higher level fighters auto-killing low HD enemies could also work.

I don't remember this rule from 1E. All I remember is the fighter getting a number of attacks equal to his level against opponents of less than 1 HD - not a foregone instakill ability.

 

[Obryn]

every single miss against the Ancient Chromatic Dragon the 1st lvl reaper manages to wreck the Ancient Red Dragon for 3 points of damage.

...which will avail him of nothing whatsoever when the dragon turns around and kills him with a quick burst of fire breath. Seriously, you're making up some absurd examples here.

This got me thinking... if you're a low level NPC.. why EVER be anything other than a reaper? If you have a positive STR score... a small horde of kobolds with 14 str (not entirely unheard of for fighting)could tear down just about anything of equal and low level, if they're all reapers.

...because not everything you run into is a kobold? And because your minion-grade monsters don't get feats?

If I have to have footmen, why not make every single last one of them reapers? That way they all autokill commoners, kobolds, goblins, whatever? And god help the low level party facing them.

Because they are not PCs and your 0-level hirelings don't get feats? If you have someone with feats, they're more henchman-grade, and that gets expensive fast - and difficult to find, to boot. Hope you've maxed your Charisma and have plans to dispatch them before it's time to divide treasure!

How about this example: "If I can get an army of wizards against this dragon, it will be dogmeat!" Note that this works whether Magic Missile is a "minor" or a 1st-level spell. Get that many wizards going, and anything dies. Why shouldn't the same hold true for badass Fighters with the Slayer feat?

-O

 

[JRRNeiklot]

So you're saying that when facing an opponent with an AC of say 18, made up of a base amount of 10 and +8 for some heavy armour, and you roll a 17 to hit, that should be interpreted as a whiff? If your opponent did not have his heavy armour, you would have hit. His heavy armour makes him a dodging machine?

You don't think a more reasonable interpretation is that you made contact, but the armour absorbed the blow? And in such cases, at least, that a bit of damage from a "miss" could still get through the armour? Having a mace smash into your breastplate is hardly a painless experience.

Has "miss" ever been defined in game terms as anything other than "failing to roll high enough on an attack roll"?

In the above case, the 17 did indeed hit the armor. But if armor doesn't prevent damage, why wear it? The 18 penetrates the armor hard enough to do damage or bypasses it by stabbing through a joint. The 17 just bounces off and I generally narrate hits like that as such. An arrow glances offf your helm, etc. In the above case, a 9 would be an absolute miss, and a 2 is "just a bit outside." How again am I taking damage? From laughing at the feeble attempt to hit me? A miss is a miss, damnit. Suppose a guy has 30 hit points and I roll below 5 10 times. With an 18 strength, I just killed him without coming anywhere near him. Lame. Without a possibility of failure, there's no point in playing.

 

[Fifth Element]

In the above case, the 17 did indeed hit the armor. But if armor doesn't prevent damage, why wear it?

Umm...to take 3 points of damage instead of 9 to 19?

A miss is a miss, damnit. Suppose a guy has 30 hit points and I roll below 5 10 times. With an 18 strength, I just killed him without coming anywhere near him. Lame. Without a possibility of failure, there's no point in playing.

So...this opponent is just standing there and letting you swing at him for 10 rounds without doing anything? If that's all he's doing, you have no possiblity of faliure regardless of what you're doing?

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

What, exactly, makes it so good that it shouldn't be replaced by an ability that more people would find acceptable?

I like the way it works now and I don't want it replaced. There is also the principle of the matter that if we remove every mechanic that a vocal minority dislikes-- for reasons that have nothing to do with game balance and very little to do with verisimilitude-- we won't have a game left to play.

I don't think anyone is saying that you have to allow it in your home games, but those of us that like this mechanic-- and I love it-- don't want it to be removed from the rulebooks because of the handful of (mostly) 3.X fans that are opposed to Fighter having nice things.

Something. I'm just curious what's so great about the current ability that it's worth keeping over changing to something that more people will be on board with. Anyone? As always, play what you like

It's lame when you're fighting kobolds because you're going to kill them automatically and you're only ever going to miss them rarely. Slayers also get cleave, which is much more useful against vermin.

Reaper is a cool power when you're fighting a boss with high AC and you're the one constantly chipping away at him while everyone else is only hitting him half the time. Let the other Fighters protect the weak and carry everyone else's gear for them. You are the Slayer, and your job is to make things dead.

I have absolutely no narrative/versimilitude reason for disliking the mechanic, and I have basically zero patience for an attitude of "wizards get cool stuff because MAGIC."

Especially considering that this is being presented as traditional D&D, largely by adherents of 3.X, when Fighters in AD&D were vastly more powerful-- capable of matching Clerics and Wizards for combat effectiveness and survivability at least until name level.

I, for one, am glad to see Fighters not suck in a way that does not require Encounter and Daily powers. (Surge isn't a true 'Daily' power.) Give them some good 'combat option' at-will attacks, that other classes don't get, and some stance abilities... and you've got an awesome melee combatant that doesn't look or feel like a spellcaster.

And I think it's pretty good at low levels - Slayers should be able to mow through kobolds.

Yeah. Fighters in general, really. I'd like to see Cleave/Great Cleave as one of the at-will Fighter maneuvers-- maybe it isn't as accurate as other maneuvers (so it's better for Slayers) and it doesn't do as much damage, but it allows you to spread the pain. Kinda like the 'sweep' maneuver from AD&D.

With that said, it's basically the most boring way to mow through lesser opponents imaginable. This seems to be borne out in playtest reports; if a slayer doesn't even need to roll a die, it's kinda boring, no? Regardless of how thematic it is?

Yeah, agreed. Reaper isn't for automatically killing one Kobold per round, since everyone else is pretty much doing that anyway. It's for chipping away at the big bastard nobody else can hit.

How about automatic miss on a natural 1, with no auto-damage? Seems fair and easy enough. I've used rules like that forever.

I've got no problem with that as a general rule. Rolling a natural 1 on an attack roll is a 'critical miss' that inflicts no damage-- regardless of abilities to the contrary-- and imposes no conditions. It's just a complete and total failure of whatever it was you were just trying to do.

And since some guy threw a &$#% fit when I assumed we'd have DR and untyped damage in fifth edition, I'll go ahead and assume we don't this time around and so yeah... an army of first level reapers all whiff hardcore against the ancient red dragon, and bring him down in a single round.

You realize that this would be an example of the system functioning exactly as intended, right? That's why all the math is flat-- so that you don't need minion rules for a bunch of lowly mooks to drag down a high-level PC or monster.

Chances are, that army of low-level Slayers-- assuming that Slayers of any level exist in sufficient quantity to make armies out of-- are going to be capable of actually making their attack rolls against the ancient red dragon at least 20% of the time anyway. Not to mention, assuming this army of Slayers are 14 Dex with bows (since there's only so many people you can pile on a dragon) it's going to take hundreds of them to mow down an ancient dragon down in one turn... and chances are, if Next dragons are anything like 4e dragons, that ancient red dragon is only going to need a couple of rounds to murder them right the Hell back.

This got me thinking... if you're a low level NPC.. why EVER be anything other than a reaper?

Because it requires special training and aptitude that the overwhelming majority of NPCs just don't have? Monsters don't have class levels or feats, and the majority of humanoid monsters in the Bestiary don't have anything that resembles class features.

As it was in every version of D&D but 3.X, NPCs don't follow the same rules that PCs do, because they don't need to. NPCs that use PC rules are as rare and special as the PCs themselves.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Umm...to take 3 points of damage instead of 9 to 19?


So...this opponent is just standing there and letting you swing at him for 10 rounds without doing anything? If that's all he's doing, you have no possiblity of faliure regardless of what you're doing?

Or maybe he's doing the same thing, but I have 31 hit points. We never came within 10 feet of each other, yet he's dead and I'm bleeding from 10 wounds.