Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Viktyr Gehrig" data-source="post: 5932468" data-attributes="member: 9249">Considering that I just used it as an example of dealing damage on a miss? It's obvious that that is exactly what I am saying.Probably, but a system like that just isn't compatible with the way D&D does combat. Shadowrun does that kind of armor pretty well.I think for an edition of the game that is trying to eliminate as fiddly mechanics as possible that this is exceptionally fiddly, and I would argue a substantial portion of the Slayer's 'miss' damage is fatigue from attempting to defend oneself from his relentless attacks.Trying to fight someone who keeps battering aside your defenses is exhausting and wears down your capacity to defend yourself quickly.This rule doesn't cause the slightest hiccup in my suspension of disbelief, and I've explained why. You are attaching far too much concrete significance to an incredibly abstract mechanical representation of combat and ignoring parts of that representation that are far less realistic than the rules you are complaining about.Like the existence and nature of hit points in the first place, and the ability of a person to take multiple 'solid blows' from a skilled swordsman and continue fighting-- not at full capacity, as happens in all editions of D&D, but at all.Because it's a neat, flavorful mechanic and the arguments against it-- based in a 'realism' that's wholly unrealistic-- don't hold water.You play 4e. You do the same thing to Wizard powers that deal damage on a miss? Or is this just another round of 'melee can't have nice things'?</blockquote>

Verification