Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Herremann the Wise" data-source="post: 5932088" data-attributes="member: 11300">You should have quoted my entire response incorporating touch AC rather than clipping it off. I agree that a 17 is a hit in that it strikes the opponent but due to their armor the glancing blow was not strong enough to deal hit point damage. I think armor in this regard is too simplistic and would prefer Armor absorbing damage but again, best for another thread. In the case you present, hitting a 10 AC or better is considered a hit and a 9 AC or less is considered a miss. The problem I have with a slayer &quot;miss&quot; is that it lumps a genuine miss, and a miss due to armor etc. in together obfuscating what the hell actually happened (particularly when an abysmally rolled miss potentially kills something). Split these into the slayer not hitting the touch AC as 0hp damage and a failure due to armor dealing STR mod hp damage and I'm cool as a cucumber with it. As stands, the designers can surely design this better.I think 3.x/PF handles this well with Touch AC or at least lays the foundation for it. Again it would be nice if the definitions used in the core rules made sense. A hit striking the opponent (even if not well enough to damage) is a hit. A miss, misses the opponent completely. Would it be that confusing for everyone if they did this?Best RegardsHerremann the Wise</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Herremann the Wise, post: 5932088, member: 11300"] You should have quoted my entire response incorporating touch AC rather than clipping it off. I agree that a 17 is a hit in that it strikes the opponent but due to their armor the glancing blow was not strong enough to deal hit point damage. I think armor in this regard is too simplistic and would prefer Armor absorbing damage but again, best for another thread. In the case you present, hitting a 10 AC or better is considered a hit and a 9 AC or less is considered a miss. The problem I have with a slayer "miss" is that it lumps a genuine miss, and a miss due to armor etc. in together obfuscating what the hell actually happened (particularly when an abysmally rolled miss potentially kills something). Split these into the slayer not hitting the touch AC as 0hp damage and a failure due to armor dealing STR mod hp damage and I'm cool as a cucumber with it. As stands, the designers can surely design this better. I think 3.x/PF handles this well with Touch AC or at least lays the foundation for it. Again it would be nice if the definitions used in the core rules made sense. A hit striking the opponent (even if not well enough to damage) is a hit. A miss, misses the opponent completely. Would it be [I]that [/I]confusing for everyone if they did this? Best Regards Herremann the Wise [/QUOTE]

Verification