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

[Weather Report]

I said it in another thread, this damage-on-a-miss business seems a bit like the mollycoddling in modern games and children, as George Carlin said "...you were the last winner..."

Mod Note: After several moderator warnings in the thread, snarky or insulting posts are not likely to serve you well for much of anything. Please avoid casting such aspersions, folks. Thank you. ~Umbran

Meant to say "winner", I have now edited.

 

[Weather Report]

Epic logic fail 101.

I see two threads on the first page about this subject, both started by you. A vocal minority does not constitute a majority. Heck, everyone on this site put together is a small minority.

Yes, neither does a vocal minority that really digs damage-on-a-miss constitute a majority.

 

[Herschel]

Not just on this site I'm afraid.

There are people over on the WoTc website, RPG.net and even Mearls has decided to take a look at the mechanic.

If trying to convince yourself that there is only a small minority helps you sleep at night then you go ahead and enjoy it while you can.

You mean the WotC site where one of the "guys" who keeps bringing it up has at least 6 different IDs he rotates through and is also on this site?

Face facts, the entire number of people who even answered this poll is fewer than the number of people playing LFR at any one time slot last year at Gen Con or playing the Delve at Gen Con this year.

That's a rather insignificant number.

 

[Herschel]

Yes, neither does a vocal minority that really digs damage-on-a-miss constitute a majority.

Except Mearls has the data and hasn't ditched it. He gave the PC answer but his data says it's testing well and he's going to let that weigh more than 5 people spamming a couple of internet message boards with threads.

The total respondants to this poll are what, .2% of the number of DDI subscribers alone.

 

[Imaro]

I posted this concern in the other thread but would like to see what people in this one have to say as well...

I'm curious how those who are approaching this from a "narrative" viewpoint deal with the fact that this mechanic basically invalidates another narrative... that of the graceful dodger? Since this mechanic can never have a narrative where it misses... what happens when these mechanics for this narrative of a relentless fighter interact with a monster, NPC or even another PC who has the narrative of being so quick and light on their feet that they are rarely, if ever, hit? I'm not sure a mechanic that can totally invalidate a pretty common fantasy narrative like the graceful dodger is a good mechanic.

 

[Halivar]

I'm curious how those who are approaching this from a "narrative" viewpoint deal with the fact that this mechanic basically invalidates another narrative... that of the graceful dodger? Since this mechanic can never have a narrative where it misses... what happens when these mechanics for this narrative of a relentless fighter interact with a monster, NPC or even another PC who has the narrative of being so quick and light on their feet that they are rarely, if ever, hit? I'm not sure a mechanic that can totally invalidate a pretty common fantasy narrative like the graceful dodger is a good mechanic.

In these cases it would be more appropriate to use a modifier other than STR bonus (as we discussed much earlier in the other thread), and then the ability becomes a more general purpose ability, and not necessarily GWF-specific. But then, I think that would be a better use for it anyway.

 

[Herschel]

1 point of damage and the possibility of all sorts of riders on a successful hit.

...and the enemy will get another round of attacks because it takes three hits vs. two to take it down. .

 

[Imaro]

In these cases it would be more appropriate to use a modifier other than STR bonus (as we discussed much earlier in the other thread), and then the ability becomes a more general purpose ability, and not necessarily GWF-specific. But then, I think that would be a better use for it anyway.

But it still makes the narrative of the graceful dodger impossible...

 

[Halivar]

But it still makes the narrative of the graceful dodger impossible...

Not if hit-points aren't meat. If they have an absurdly high AC from non-armor sources, you could narrate hp-loss as a loss of positioning, or exerting themselves to avoid the blow. In the case of the graceful dodger, only the strike that reduces them to zero hit-points needs to actually connect kinetically.

 

[Umbran]

what happens when these mechanics for this narrative of a relentless fighter interact with a monster, NPC or even another PC who has the narrative of being so quick and light on their feet that they are rarely, if ever, hit?

To oversimplify, you've got two basic choices: "Immovable object and unstoppable force", or "rock-paper-scissors".

So, damage on a miss is basically the scissors to the paper of the graceful dodger (assuming the mechanics really support the GD). So long as there's a rock for the scissors, we're good.

In general, if you think, "there's something in the game that can hurt me" equates to "my narrative is completely invalidated" there's a problem of concept involved.