D&D 5E I just don't buy the reasoning behind "damage on a miss".

[skotothalamos]

Agh, my eyes!

But I missed you!

 

[Burninator]

Agh, my eyes!! haha, +1

Now at least we know where the Reaper feat came from, some silliness lifted directly from 4e, probably by the same guy who originally wrote it and is now pushing GWF on us.

 

[Mistwell]

Agh, my eyes!! haha, +1

Now at least we know where the Reaper feat came from, some silliness lifted directly from 4e, probably by the same guy who originally wrote it and is now pushing GWF on us.

You can not like it. But, can you deny it's part of the history of the game?

 

[Burninator]

You can not like it. But, can you deny it's part of the history of the game?

Why deny the truth? It's right there for everyone to see, it was created in 4e and dropped directly in 5e.

The dinosaurs are part of history, too. Do you want them back, walking around Walmart? (there's a joke in there, somewhere. hehehe)

 

[Mistwell]

Why deny the truth? It's right there for everyone to see, it was created in 4e and dropped directly in 5e.

The dinosaurs are part of history, too. Do you want them back, walking around Walmart? (there's a joke in there, somewhere. hehehe)

I'd love to have dinosaurs back! That would be awesome. Maybe we can create giant robots to fight them?

 

[Wicht]

You can not like it. But, can you deny it's part of the history of the game?

Just as with Star Trek V, some history is better forgotten.

 

[mlund]

The part that strikes me as the most funny is that "damage on a miss" isn't the mechanic in search of rationalization - "Armor Class" is the mechanic is constantly groping around in the dark for a rationalization and failing miserably.

Which is a necessary concession in a HP system. Otherwise you get the "dude with five axe blows who's fine, but then collapses from the small dagger scratch". You can't narrate attacks based on the attacker's rolls. You have to look at the result to the target. Even if it's a crit with a greataxe that does 90 damage, if you hit a guy with 150 HP it didn't cleave him in half. That's why I only narrate the hit that drops someone below half HP and the hit that drops them below 0 as consequential hits. It's just not realistic otherwise!

Completely correct. The last 1 point of damage in D&D was the only one that ever counted in any way that mattered to a simulation. It didn't matter whether it was 1 falling damage from a short fall after taking 90 points of mauling from a dragon. All the clawing and biting and breath weapon "hits" and "damage" didn't amount to enough physical harm to incapacitate (or even slow) the subject. That 1 point fall knocked him clean out (or broke his neck if you're in a 0 = dead edition). Meanwhile the guy who falls 5 times as far and took 30 damage but still has 1 HP left gets disemboweled by a house cat scratch in 3.X/pathfinder.

"Hits," "Misses," "Damage," "Armor Class," and "Hit Points" are not simulation mechanics. They are score-keeping mechanics for a game. What they represent in the "game world" is purely a narrative effort sensitive to context.

- Marty Lund

 

[ForeverSlayer]

The part that strikes me as the most funny is that "damage on a miss" isn't the mechanic in search of rationalization - "Armor Class" is the mechanic is constantly groping around in the dark for a rationalization and failing miserably.



Completely correct. The last 1 point of damage in D&D was the only one that ever counted in any way that mattered to a simulation. It didn't matter whether it was 1 falling damage from a short fall after taking 90 points of mauling from a dragon. All the clawing and biting and breath weapon "hits" and "damage" didn't amount to enough physical harm to incapacitate (or even slow) the subject. That 1 point fall knocked him clean out (or broke his neck if you're in a 0 = dead edition). Meanwhile the guy who falls 5 times as far and took 30 damage but still has 1 HP left gets disemboweled by a house cat scratch in 3.X/pathfinder.

"Hits," "Misses," "Damage," "Armor Class," and "Hit Points" are not simulation mechanics. They are score-keeping mechanics for a game. What they represent in the "game world" is purely a narrative effort sensitive to context.

- Marty Lund

Quote?

 

[Ahnehnois]

You can not like it. But, can you deny it's part of the history of the game?

Who's denying that?

Just as with Star Trek V, some history is better forgotten.

Ouch.

 

[TwoSix]

Quote?

"Yer a wizard, Harry!" -Hagrid, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's (Philosopher's) Stone