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

[Mistwell]

not dramatically interesting, not tactically engaging, and not fun. It's simply a failed thought experiment, that's all.

People disagree with you on the subjective issue of whether something is interesting, engaging, and fun. When you tell them they're wrong, you're telling them they're having badwrongfun. NOTHING pissed people off more than you telling them they're having the wrong kind of fun.

 

[Ahnehnois]

People disagree with you on the subjective issue of whether something is interesting, engaging, and fun. When you tell them they're wrong, you're telling them they're having badwrongfun. NOTHING pissed people off more than you telling them they're having the wrong kind of fun.

No, I'm not. I'm simply articulating an opinion. Someone else wants to post their opinion, they can, too.

That particular post is simply me clearing up a misattribution; I don't know how else I'd go about doing that.

 

[Obryn]

Now I remember why I'm not around much anymore.

 

[Mistwell]

No, I'm not. I'm simply articulating an opinion. Someone else wants to post their opinion, they can, too.

That particular post is simply me clearing up a misattribution; I don't know how else I'd go about doing that.

When you call something a failed thought experiment, you're implying it's an objective conclusion.

 

[Ahnehnois]

When you call something a failed thought experiment, you're implying it's an objective conclusion.

I'm implying "IMO" because I posted to an online message board.

 

[variant]

I hope that if they keep the option, they move it to a feat instead of keeping it as a vital ability for someone wanting to wield a two-handed weapon. Right now any Ranger, Fighter, and Paladin with a two-handed weapon is basically forced to take it.

It would also help if they would have it only do damage if the roll isn't a critical miss.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

...or make it cost some kind of character resource so that it isn't too spamworthy.

 

[Mistwell]

I hope that if they keep the option, they move it to a feat instead of keeping it as a vital ability for someone wanting to wield a two-handed weapon. Right now any Ranger, Fighter, and Paladin with a two-handed weapon is basically forced to take it.

It would also help if they would have it only do damage if the roll isn't a critical miss.

What the what?

It's just a Fighter ability, not a Ranger or Paladin one. It's not the only option for a two handed weapon. In fact, it's mechanically not the best option for a two handed weapon. Either Protection, or Defense, are better (mechanically) for a two handed weapon wielder.

The irony is, this ability grows increasingly useless as levels progress. An auto-3, auto-4, or auto-5 hit points damage at low levels is nice. But at level 15? Nobody's ever going to care, as hit points will be so much higher.

 

[Paraxis]

What the what?

It's just a Fighter ability, not a Ranger or Paladin one. It's not the only option for a two handed weapon. In fact, it's mechanically not the best option for a two handed weapon. Either Protection, or Defense, are better (mechanically) for a two handed weapon wielder.

The irony is, this ability grows increasingly useless as levels progress. An auto-3, auto-4, or auto-5 hit points damage at low levels is nice. But at level 15? Nobody's ever going to care, as hit points will be so much higher.

It is a ranger class feature and a paladin one. In fact for colossus slayer favored enemy rangers it is amazing. Because the slayer's momentum triggers on damage so the first attack can miss, then all other missed attacks still get to add +1d6 because that damage is "extra damage" not "extra damage on a hit".
It also stacks with the ranger spell hunter's mark for another +1d6 on a miss.

So a 5th level ranger using a polearm with polearm master feat gets 4 swings all of the counting as two handed weapon attacks a round all but the first doing str mod+2d6 damage on a miss.

 

[Abraxas]

However, I've seen Reaping Strike's impact on play aplenty. When interfacing with the minion rules it is irrelevant; minions can't die on a miss. However, this situation provokes the premise movement from "but unbalanced" to "but realistic simulation." 4e provides immunity to such an issue via those minion rules and the fact that proportionately, the HP total:Str damage ratio provides thematics (relentless berserker et al) and tactical overhead (and some fun with build synergy), rather than raw power on a per deployment of Reaping Strike basis. 5e has neither of these in place that I'm aware of so At-Will damage on a miss could be a problem (i'm not convinced yet as I'd need to see the math) with low HP/unit and no minion immunization to damage on a miss.

First, I've played a lot of 4E - epic levels and all that, and am still in a regular game.
Second, I am not a fan of damage on a miss powers/abilities.

That being said, I have the following comments

The powers with damage on a miss in 4E, IMO, did have one definite downside with the way the game played at the table. That downside was how they interacted (or failed to interact) with minions. On numerous occaisions a DoaM power would kill the BBEG and leave it's minions standing - as we got higher levels this happened more often because that half damage became pretty significant.

However, this problem could have been mostly mitigated because of the multiple defenses everyone had. For example, for a DoaM power that targeted AC, instead of it being Miss: half damage it could have been Miss: If the attack would have hit the target's Reflex Defense it does half damage.

Doing something similar in 5E is how I think this particular ability should be handled - so it's not the character can never not fail to do damage but the character has a fall back that let's him do damage when he would normally miss.

If the designers choose not to take that path I hope they don't make it core and instead put it in some tactical module. The reason I feel this way is that I much prefer to make house rules that add something to the game instead of take something away from the game.