Kobolds Are Supposed To Be Pathetic Combatants

[Mort]

NEARLY died. When surround by opponents on every square at first level you shouldn't NEARLY die, you should die..

Depends, in a grim and gritty game yes. In D&D where you have decent HP (even at first level) and where there's a cleric doing everything he can to make sure you don't go down? maybe not.

If you like grim and gritty - limit the healing magic and there you go.

Regardless though, you're stating the situation completely wrong. there were 6 kobolds (and about 4 rats at the time) and the party had 4 people, I never said the slayer was surrounded on every side by kobolds.

The problem is that this doesn't represent training. The fighter's +2 on weapon damage represents training. This represents that no matter what the fighter is able to get damage in... for some reason. It is the "for some reason" I take objection to. It is the fact that EVERY TIME, no matter what, doesn't matter if they are drunk off their ass or poisoned or anything, as long as they have STR 16 they will KO a kobold WHEN THEY MISS.

It's not "for some reason," it's that HPs are an abstract construct and the Slayer theme plays with that more than some others. It's a minor benefit that can KO a minor (as in really minor) monster or cause annoyance to a larger one.

Not everyone is comfortable with that - and I think the designers of 5e realize this which is why this is in the form of an add on theme. Don't like it? Don't use it!

But as you just pointed out in the post up until here. They AREN'T dangerous in numbers. They aren't dangerous to that fighter because even on a miss he is killing them dead. As pointed out earlier he may as well not bother rolling and could point at the kobold and just tell the DM that it dies - because he does 3 on a miss, no matter what.

After having fought 6 kobolds and a bunch of 1 HP rats, 2 characters nearly died - that's dangerous. It was dangerous enough that when they saw 30 kobolds the group did not even think for a moment that they had any chance at all (and they didn't, it would have been a TPK 99.9% of the time).

BUT THEY AREN'T. The part of the post you quoted shows that the fighter is surrounded by 8 kobolds. That represents one in every square. If the fighter is getting out of that situation by MISSING attack rolls then something IS wrong with the game. Keep in mind they are doing this at first level, not at 15th. They are JUST starting their heroic journey and already they have the same ability superman does when he tosses 8 guys off of him when they dogpile. The kobolds simply aren't threatening in numbers.

As i just stated above, yes, yes they are. But aside from that, short of rats these are the weakest monsters you can get (at least in their "basic" form), there is nothing wrong with them being cannon fodder.

They aren't even as strong as 4e minions because you had to at least hit minions.

Not true, automatic damage works on minions just fine. I believe the 4e 1st level fighter has an identical power btw (reaping strike I believe) - and yes I liked that one too.

Entirely ignore the fact that I hate the concept of minions.

It's quite obvious you like your D&D a bit less abstract, that's fine, and it looks like it will be supported, but it is far from "the one true way."

BUT IT DOES. This is slightly tangenty as it deals more with the slayer's ability than kobolds, but it does work on higher level or more HP creatures too. They still take 3. Every round, no matter what, on a miss. Explain that to me? It isn't skill, grit, determination, luck or anything I understand to be related to HP. It is something completely unique that says that this guy is so kickass that he can hurt EVERYONE regardless of skill as long as they are within his reach, even if he misses. I don't get that.

It's not a unique ability, anyone can take the theme if they want. And wizards can do it too, in the form of magic missle.

It's the same concept as the rogue's take 10 ability - the slayer is so focused on damage that they always do at least some - not enough to kill in one blow (unless the monster is truly weak), but some. If you are completely uncomfortable with this abstract concept you have 2 choices 1) don't allow the slayer theme or anything like it (a perfectly valid choice) or 2) treat it as a necrotic aura, a gift from the god of death, if you will, and problem solved.

First of all you are right. It is going to kill you hit or miss. Second of all, it is going to damage even those people or creatures that don't start with just 2 HP it is going to hurt EVERYONE. Third, the problem arises that the kobolds never have a chance. They only have 2 HP. Unless the DM decides to assign them 4 HP to start they are going to die, regardless if the fighter hits their AC.

Only the mook kobolds have 2 HPs and frankly - they don't have a chance, not one on one, that's the whole point!

Right, and that the fighter is going to bite the ear off the ogre ever round (on a miss) until it is dead..... how many ears does the ogre have?

Ear, other ear, nose, poke in the eye, wear it down - it's an endless descriptive list really.

But the real point is you are focusing way too much on hit vs. miss. This is more an ongoing damage effect (and not even a particularly large one). But again, if you don't like it, don't use it.

 

[Fifth Element]

They AREN'T dangerous in numbers. They aren't dangerous to that fighter because even on a miss he is killing them dead.

How does one individual kobold not being dangerous to the fighter mean that they are not dangerous in numbers?

If a fighter is literally surrounded by 8 kobolds, it's going to take him 8 rounds to kill them all dead. Assuming he wins initiative that's 28 kobold attacks on him before the last is killed dead, made with advantage. That's not dangerous?

With some rough math, attacking with their daggers the kobolds would cause an average of over 50 hit points damage in those 8 rounds. Enough to KILL THE FIGHTER DEAD twice over.

And that's standing toe-to-toe with the fighter, which of course kobolds would not and should not do.

BUT THEY AREN'T. The part of the post you quoted shows that the fighter is surrounded by 8 kobolds. That represents one in every square. If the fighter is getting out of that situation by MISSING attack rolls then something IS wrong with the game.

That's a RATHER LARGE IF, as illustrated above.

BUT IT DOES. This is slightly tangenty as it deals more with the slayer's ability than kobolds, but it does work on higher level or more HP creatures too. They still take 3.

It's not going to automatically kill a more powerful opponent; I thought that was the main objection here, that kobolds died automatically, just by pointing at them or sneezing on them or something similarly flippant.

3 hit points to a creature with, say, 88 hit points is nothing. The ability does not scale with opponent's hit points. It's deadly against the wimpiest of the wimpy, but merely a scratch against a really dangerous foe.

 

[ren1999]

To me, a Kobold is a cross between a blue dwarf, a lizard and a rat. It dresses like a miner and wears a helmet with a candle on its head. Its weapons are hammers and picks.

Kobolds aren't particularly evil but they play deadly tricks on you or poison you if you don't earn their favor. They are very good at hiding and setting traps. They are not easy to kill. They're favorite magic trick is "Fool's Gold".

Kobolds are mostly found in the mines but can be found under your house, or stowaway on your boat.

Lore says they may be the spirits of dead miners that have been reborn as this subterranean race.

 

[Tovec]

Done, just done...

Depends, in a grim and gritty game yes. In D&D where you have decent HP (even at first level) and where there's a cleric doing everything he can to make sure you don't go down? maybe not.

If you like grim and gritty - limit the healing magic and there you go.

Regardless though, you're stating the situation completely wrong. there were 6 kobolds (and about 4 rats at the time) and the party had 4 people, I never said the slayer was surrounded on every side by kobolds.

I did say 8 kobolds, it was an example that you quoted.

It's not "for some reason," it's that HPs are an abstract construct and the Slayer theme plays with that more than some others. It's a minor benefit that can KO a minor (as in really minor) monster or cause annoyance to a larger one.

Not everyone is comfortable with that - and I think the designers of 5e realize this which is why this is in the form of an add on theme. Don't like it? Don't use it!

The idea suggested by the designers for any aspect I don't like is "ignore the theme" that is a slight problem to me.

After having fought 6 kobolds and a bunch of 1 HP rats, 2 characters nearly died - that's dangerous. It was dangerous enough that when they saw 30 kobolds the group did not even think for a moment that they had any chance at all (and they didn't, it would have been a TPK 99.9% of the time).

Nearly died, once again see my last post about the "nearly" aspect. If the chances of the party not losing anyone are so high then (for me) the suspense goes out the window. I recently ran a game where the party was being chased by a group of goblins. (Completely different rules/edition.) They were able to (usually) kill the goblins in one hit but they were terrified because they knew if they stood toe to toe with the goblins they were going down. I would love to see a situation like this in 5e but NOTHING I have seen so far suggests it is even a possibility. For my purposes goblins are about the same power level as kobolds, especially in this example.

As i just stated above, yes, yes they are. But aside from that, short of rats these are the weakest monsters you can get (at least in their "basic" form), there is nothing wrong with them being cannon fodder.

And my point has always been that they SHOULD be weak. I take exception to HOW weak. If they died by one successful hit, even on min damage, I could understand. It is this problem that a random fighter ability is killing them on a miss that I find ridiculous. All day every day, the fighter can just say to the DM that a specific "mook level" kobold is in his way and dies. Can he do that with the palace guards? How about the shanghaied "mooks" who are working for the orcs? No, just the kobolds and rats. That I find silly.

Not true, automatic damage works on minions just fine. I believe the 4e 1st level fighter has an identical power btw (reaping strike I believe) - and yes I liked that one too.

This is a matter of opinion and preference, so I'll certainly let you have yours if you will let me have mine.

It's quite obvious you like your D&D a bit less abstract, that's fine, and it looks like it will be supported, but it is far from "the one true way."

It's not a unique ability, anyone can take the theme if they want. And wizards can do it too, in the form of magic missle.

It's the same concept as the rogue's take 10 ability - the slayer is so focused on damage that they always do at least some - not enough to kill in one blow (unless the monster is truly weak), but some. If you are completely uncomfortable with this abstract concept you have 2 choices 1) don't allow the slayer theme or anything like it (a perfectly valid choice) or 2) treat it as a necrotic aura, a gift from the god of death, if you will, and problem solved.

The problem here is that the abstraction doesn't even match the explanation of the abstraction we were given by Mearls. We have to invent our own reasons why the fighter is able to do half damage. Solutions presented here are that the weapon breaks through the kobolds spear and kills him or that the fighter is biting the ogres ear off. The problems I see is that these assumptions aren't at all related by the rules outside of the "abstract" nature of damage. If you DO rule that is what happened, what then happens later if that ogre doesn't die and is now missing his ear? Does the party still loot the kobold's spear when the encounter is over or was it destroyed. Forget those points and realize that the fighter is ALWAYS DOING THIS!! On every miss he always smashes through the kobol's weapon and strikes him dead. There is no error chance, he may as well be using magic missile.

IRRELEVANT BUT: If I tell my players they can no longer do this awesome thing that kills kobolds for free and is part of their character, then I am going to be the bad guy taking away their awesome ability. I don't like being that guy, even if I find the ability to be completely without explanation.

Only the mook kobolds have 2 HPs and frankly - they don't have a chance, not one on one, that's the whole point!

Which is my point exactly. Why do kobolds only have 2 HP? Why does the party have SO MANY more, at first level. Why does the part have such "mad skillz" that no one else gets just because they have a name? I would have less issues (still some but less) if the kobolds they were fighting had 8 HP perhaps. Then the fighter would still have to hit them to kill them on a single blow. This is EXACTLY the point of this thread and what I object to. The reaper ability I dislike but it isn't the real problem for me.

Ear, other ear, nose, poke in the eye, wear it down - it's an endless descriptive list really.

But the real point is you are focusing way too much on hit vs. miss. This is more an ongoing damage effect (and not even a particularly large one). But again, if you don't like it, don't use it.

See above.

3 hit points to a creature with, say, 88 hit points is nothing. The ability does not scale with opponent's hit points. It's deadly against the wimpiest of the wimpy, but merely a scratch against a really dangerous foe.

It is still important when mixed with a variety of other things. It is still important that missing no longer means missing. It is still important enough that even with 88 HP (which I oddly find to be too many) the ogre can't avoid the damage. He can't effectively block the swing of the fighter's blade.. because it cleaves through his weapon. He can't effectively stop the fighter from jumping up and tearing off his ear. Why can't he? Um.. cus the fighter needs to be balanced with the wizard who has magic missile? That is the best reason I can fathom at the moment. It might be due to another cause but I cannot see one that justifies me to date so I doubt another reason will.

If there IS a good reason why the fighter can always, reliably do 3 damage to every creature on a miss then let me see it. None of the explanations given so far by anyone on this thread, on other threads on this board or by WotC can seem to give me an actual reason.

I also have nothing to say about the rest of your post there Fifth, just nothing. Clearly we disagree and that is fine.

All I can say is that 5th edition seems not to be the game for me. I'll keep watching to see if that changes but as of right now I am officially done. That is fine though. If anything it means they no longer have to pander to me and I guess somehow that might help them in the long run. I don't know, but it is all these little assumptions that I find to be just too much when taken in concert. I play DnD and I spend entirely too much time looking and thinking about these things, which is where the issue comes from in the first place.

It just seems that we can't all agree on things. Yes there are blocks that form which will argue one side or another on a number of issues but the more I fight the more I see that middle ground disappearing.

It feels like I keep saying there is a hole in the road but people keep telling me not to worry about it because you can just walk around it or jump over it. I don't want to have to tiptoe around the issue. I want to address it. I want to look at the hole and figure out what caused it and then when I know that, patch it up. I want to do that for all the holes. WotC seems happy enough patching them up though, or building bridges over them when they are too wide to jump. I think that is backwards but that is just me and they proved years ago they don't care so I'm not going to try and make them.


I do just have one last thing to say. None of you who disagreed with me actually answered my question:

Why is it that kobolds have 2 HP but not the humans, dwaves, halflings or elves?

 

[Fifth Element]

I also have nothing to say about the rest of your post there Fifth, just nothing. Clearly we disagree and that is fine.

Well, IMO it clearly refuted your claim that kobolds are not dangerous in numbers. Your argument was that since one kobold is not a threat, then no amount of kobolds can be a threat. That's demonstrably false, as I demonstrated.

Why is it that kobolds have 2 HP but not the humans, dwaves, halflings or elves?

I'm pretty sure I mentioned earlier in the thread that 3-hp kobolds might be the real culprit here.

 

[Mort]

Why is it that kobolds have 2 HP but not the humans, dwaves, halflings or elves?

Since no one in this thread is an actual game designer, I'm not sure why you're expecting some sort of definitive answer on their motivation.

But I'll take a stab at it. It's simply an arbitrary decision (that carries across editions) that basic kobolds are the weakest "humanoids" around - so they have 2 HPs. I sincerely doubt it's any more complicated than that.

The idea suggested by the designers for any aspect I don't like is "ignore the theme" that is a slight problem to me.

When one of the design goals is modularity (picking and choosing aspects you like and ignoring those you don't) why is this a problem?

Nearly died, once again see my last post about the "nearly" aspect. If the chances of the party not losing anyone are so high then (for me) the suspense goes out the window. I recently ran a game where the party was being chased by a group of goblins. (Completely different rules/edition.) They were able to (usually) kill the goblins in one hit but they were terrified because they knew if they stood toe to toe with the goblins they were going down. I would love to see a situation like this in 5e but NOTHING I have seen so far suggests it is even a possibility. For my purposes goblins are about the same power level as kobolds, especially in this example.

First, kobolds have 2 HPs for this playtest. If this sits badly for you, it's the perfect opportunity to express your dislike to the designers (for example in the survey, there is plenty of room for specific comments).

And my point has always been that they SHOULD be weak. I take exception to HOW weak. If they died by one successful hit, even on min damage, I could understand. It is this problem that a random fighter ability is killing them on a miss that I find ridiculous. All day every day, the fighter can just say to the DM that a specific "mook level" kobold is in his way and dies. Can he do that with the palace guards? How about the shanghaied "mooks" who are working for the orcs? No, just the kobolds and rats. That I find silly.

The ability allows an automatic kill on anything with less than 3 HPs - so if said guards or mooks have that - then yes it can be done.

I notice that you haven't brought the mage's magic missile into this - the mage can auto kill the kobolds too, at range even! Is you're lack of problem just because "it's magic?"

This is a matter of opinion and preference, so I'll certainly let you have yours if you will let me have mine.

I was just pointing out that your comment re 4e was incorrect. As to the opinion part, of course it's a matter of opinion, we're not discussing rules interpretations here, this is all a matter of preference.

The problem here is that the abstraction doesn't even match the explanation of the abstraction we were given by Mearls. We have to invent our own reasons why the fighter is able to do half damage. Solutions presented here are that the weapon breaks through the kobolds spear and kills him or that the fighter is biting the ogres ear off. The problems I see is that these assumptions aren't at all related by the rules outside of the "abstract" nature of damage. If you DO rule that is what happened, what then happens later if that ogre doesn't die and is now missing his ear? Does the party still loot the kobold's spear when the encounter is over or was it destroyed. Forget those points and realize that the fighter is ALWAYS DOING THIS!! On every miss he always smashes through the kobol's weapon and strikes him dead. There is no error chance, he may as well be using magic missile.

I can practically guaranty that the discussion by the designers was something to the effect of, how can we mitigate the fact that the supposedly high damage fighter does exactly 0 if he has a streak of bad rolls? And one answer was to set a minimum level of damage to ensure the fighter can at least do "some" damage, because he's supposed to be good at it.

As for the magic missile comparison: Magic missile is easy to rationalize because "it's magic," while reaper is harder because it requires a further abstraction of HPs and what exactly a hit vs. a miss is. In fact it requires you to accept the fact that someone with the reaper theme never "misses" in the traditional D&D sense - which is something that caused a bit of a fuss when 4e did it, and the designers are clearly testing to see how accepted it is in 5e.

Which is my point exactly. Why do kobolds only have 2 HP? Why does the party have SO MANY more, at first level. Why does the part have such "mad skillz" that no one else gets just because they have a name? I would have less issues (still some but less) if the kobolds they were fighting had 8 HP perhaps. Then the fighter would still have to hit them to kill them on a single blow. This is EXACTLY the point of this thread and what I object to. The reaper ability I dislike but it isn't the real problem for me.

Kobolds in the test module have 2 HPs for because the designers said so, that's it. Someone (or a group) were converting the module and decided kobolds should have 2 HPs - and there you go. I think one of my players has the original module (from way back), I'll have to ask him how many HPs the kobolds had. I would not be the least bit surprised if it was 2.

It is still important when mixed with a variety of other things. It is still important that missing no longer means missing. It is still important enough that even with 88 HP (which I oddly find to be too many) the ogre can't avoid the damage. He can't effectively block the swing of the fighter's blade.. because it cleaves through his weapon. He can't effectively stop the fighter from jumping up and tearing off his ear. Why can't he? Um.. cus the fighter needs to be balanced with the wizard who has magic missile? That is the best reason I can fathom at the moment. It might be due to another cause but I cannot see one that justifies me to date so I doubt another reason will.

The problem is you are clearly looking for a "real world" reason and there likely isn't an "all encompassing" one. It's a mechanical ability that requires a level of abstraction where "hit" and "miss" take on slightly different meanings than you've always been used to.

If there IS a good reason why the fighter can always, reliably do 3 damage to every creature on a miss then let me see it. None of the explanations given so far by anyone on this thread, on other threads on this board or by WotC can seem to give me an actual reason.

Again, you are looking for a "real world" reason, and there really isn't a definative one. The real reason is almost certainly to test how this mechanic 1) balances and 2) how people like it in relation to other shticks.

All I can say is that 5th edition seems not to be the game for me. I'll keep watching to see if that changes but as of right now I am officially done. That is fine though. If anything it means they no longer have to pander to me and I guess somehow that might help them in the long run. I don't know, but it is all these little assumptions that I find to be just too much when taken in concert. I play DnD and I spend entirely too much time looking and thinking about these things, which is where the issue comes from in the first place.

Play what you like, there's not enough time to focus on things you don't!

That said, this is an early playtest. You were clearly interested enough to participate, don't you want to stick around long enough to see if and how your concerns are addressed?

It feels like I keep saying there is a hole in the road but people keep telling me not to worry about it because you can just walk around it or jump over it. I don't want to have to tiptoe around the issue. I want to address it. I want to look at the hole and figure out what caused it and then when I know that, patch it up. I want to do that for all the holes. WotC seems happy enough patching them up though, or building bridges over them when they are too wide to jump. I think that is backwards but that is just me and they proved years ago they don't care so I'm not going to try and make them.

The problem you face is to many, your concern isn't a hole, it's a feature. Why should PCs have the same HPs as a kobold to start? Why not have enough to not risk immediate death when confronted by one of the weakest creatures in the game? Starting with 3e (when max HPs at 1st level became the norm and the level caps on HPs were removed) D&D has been trending to giving the PCs more HPs. The PCs are not just random joe schmoes living in the world, they are the PCs -and the game designers decided that deserves an edge, small as it may be.

I also think your attitude of "I care and they clearly don't" is misguided. Yes WoTC is a business but the design team et al. is staffed by people who really, really, really care about gaming and I think you do them a disservice by thinking otherwise. Just because they're focus is not your focus, does not mean they don't care!

You'll have to excuse me if some of my points seem rambling or repetitive, there's a lot of text and it is way too late here for fully coherent thought!

 

[Campbell]

Beyond the thematic elements of kobolds being the D&D's world version of Fallen from Diablo (which were probably based on D&D kobolds) there's actually support in the fiction for kobolds having less hp than humans and goblins. They breed like rabbits, face stiff competition for food, and live in unsanitary conditions.

 

[Tovec]

Since no one in this thread is an actual game designer, I'm not sure why you're expecting some sort of definitive answer on their motivation.

But I'll take a stab at it. It's simply an arbitrary decision (that carries across editions) that basic kobolds are the weakest "humanoids" around - so they have 2 HPs. I sincerely doubt it's any more complicated than that.

It was an open question, not solely one for game designers. So thank you for the answer.

However, at least in 3e kobolds had 4 HP. Which would immediately render the reaper ability a non-KO ability at least on the first swing. They clearly didn't just have 2 HP as a carryover, as in 4e they had 1 HP (as a minion) and in 3e they had 4 HP. Oh, a non-minion (at level 1) had 27 HP so rather a little more than 2 I would say.

When one of the design goals is modularity (picking and choosing aspects you like and ignoring those you don't) why is this a problem?

The problem is that their ONLY solution is to cut the themes. I am told the cut the themes if I don't like an aspect of a single theme. I am told to cut the themes if I want an old school play. This solution only serves to handicap my players, nothing more. It doesn't solve the issue of kobolds having 2 HP and being able to be defeated by a strong breeze.

Modularity may fix the problem, but I am not alone in thinking that modularity needs to be built at the beginning not tacked on at the end. Beyond that, modularity doesn't solve this problem. Giving me other tools to use is what modularity fixes. Modularity will allow me to not have to use the reaper ability, or allow me to replace the Healer theme. It doesn't change the HP structure of all creatures in the game. Even if a new HP system is introduced, such as one relating to wound points or similar, the issue will still exist because it is expected that you convert the existing material over to the "WP" system, so what is silly in one system will remain silly in another.

Modularity is a toolbox, it isn't a cure.

First, kobolds have 2 HPs for this playtest. If this sits badly for you, it's the perfect opportunity to express your dislike to the designers (for example in the survey, there is plenty of room for specific comments).

I did thank you. I just don't expect anything to change. They may get 3 HP or even 4 but that won't solve the underlying problem.

The ability allows an automatic kill on anything with less than 3 HPs - so if said guards or mooks have that - then yes it can be done.

I notice that you haven't brought the mage's magic missile into this - the mage can auto kill the kobolds too, at range even! Is you're lack of problem just because "it's magic?"

A. It impacts more than just creatures with less than 3 HP. It works on everyone, regardless of HP. It only insta-kills people with 3 or less.
B. It insta-kills people with 3 or less HP. ON A MISS.
C. At least magic missile says it can't miss. The reaper ability says no such thing. Ergo, the MM ability has a REASON it works that way, the reaper ability does not.
D. Yes "it is magic" is a viable defense for such things.
E. I dislike MM too, in case you are wondering, for the exact same reason. (In my potential 5e games I would make it a 1st or maybe even 2nd level spell. Something that costs something to cast, instead of free 24/7. But this isn't about MM.)

I can practically guaranty that the discussion by the designers was something to the effect of, how can we mitigate the fact that the supposedly high damage fighter does exactly 0 if he has a streak of bad rolls? And one answer was to set a minimum level of damage to ensure the fighter can at least do "some" damage, because he's supposed to be good at it.

As for the magic missile comparison: Magic missile is easy to rationalize because "it's magic," while reaper is harder because it requires a further abstraction of HPs and what exactly a hit vs. a miss is. In fact it requires you to accept the fact that someone with the reaper theme never "misses" in the traditional D&D sense - which is something that caused a bit of a fuss when 4e did it, and the designers are clearly testing to see how accepted it is in 5e.

The mage gets magic missile, which represents the mage's innate ability to conjur "force" to leap from their finger tips and strike an opponent. It does not miss and has a set effect. It does 1d4+1, not the mages attack stat. On average the missile is doing less than the fighter too. Also, it has an explanation, limitations, can be countered and is codified. On the other hand, the reaper ability is none of these things. It can't be countered as long as the fighter could hit but misses. It does MORE damage (on average) than the missile and it does it to all targets, so long as he misses.

Kobolds in the test module have 2 HPs for because the designers said so, that's it. Someone (or a group) were converting the module and decided kobolds should have 2 HPs - and there you go. I think one of my players has the original module (from way back), I'll have to ask him how many HPs the kobolds had. I would not be the least bit surprised if it was 2.

See above. They had 4HP in 3e and 27 in 4e, so I fail to see exactly what your point is. I don't have access to earlier editions for their HP stats but I would guess that PCs in those editions had less HP too so it comes out to be more of a wash when (afiak) 5e's HP resemble 3e and 4e more than any other.

The problem is you are clearly looking for a "real world" reason and there likely isn't an "all encompassing" one. It's a mechanical ability that requires a level of abstraction where "hit" and "miss" take on slightly different meanings than you've always been used to.

For everyone else, except the slayer, a miss is a miss. The slayer misses but the kobold still dies. I don't need real world explanations for that to see it is a flaw.

Again, you are looking for a "real world" reason, and there really isn't a definative one. The real reason is almost certainly to test how this mechanic 1) balances and 2) how people like it in relation to other shticks.

I can't fault them for being all "troll" to see what we react to. But I honestly doubt they are just doing it to see if people react. I think they see the mechanics as legitimate offerings or things they want to test. That is why, as I said; If there IS a good reason why the fighter can always, reliably do 3 damage to every creature on a miss then let [us] see it.

Play what you like, there's not enough time to focus on things you don't!

That said, this is an early playtest. You were clearly interested enough to participate, don't you want to stick around long enough to see if and how your concerns are addressed?

Based on more than my own experiences alone, I know that when WotC gets an idea in their heads then it is pretty hard to kick it loose. I have submitted my feedback and I am having my friends try the game and do the same. All I wanted to say is that I am significantly not sold on any aspect of the game thus far. I realize I went overlong about why I am unsold but that is presently neither here nor there.

The problem you face is to many, your concern isn't a hole, it's a feature. Why should PCs have the same HPs as a kobold to start? Why not have enough to not risk immediate death when confronted by one of the weakest creatures in the game? Starting with 3e (when max HPs at 1st level became the norm and the level caps on HPs were removed) D&D has been trending to giving the PCs more HPs. The PCs are not just random joe schmoes living in the world, they are the PCs -and the game designers decided that deserves an edge, small as it may be.

I also think your attitude of "I care and they clearly don't" is misguided. Yes WoTC is a business but the design team et al. is staffed by people who really, really, really care about gaming and I think you do them a disservice by thinking otherwise. Just because they're focus is not your focus, does not mean they don't care!

You'll have to excuse me if some of my points seem rambling or repetitive, there's a lot of text and it is way too late here for fully coherent thought!

I'm not saying PCs should have the same HP as kobolds to start. Please quote me where I have said anything like that.

What I have said is that 2 HP is too low. That no one should not be able to kill them on min damage. That the slayer does it WITHOUT HITTING at all.
I have said kobolds SHOULD BE WEAK. I don't know how often I have to keep saying that. They should be. I think that the playtest makes them TOO DAMNED WEAK. So weak in fact that they offer almost no contest to a part of LEVEL ONES. If the enemy isn't threatening at level one then they are never going to be threatening. I see over and over that kobolds aren't threatening enough in large groups, which is when they should be.

Beyond the thematic elements of kobolds being the D&D's world version of Fallen from Diablo (which were probably based on D&D kobolds) there's actually support in the fiction for kobolds having less hp than humans and goblins. They breed like rabbits, face stiff competition for food, and live in unsanitary conditions.

Which would at least be a reason for the 2 HP. Validity comes later but this reason can easily be changed as long as there IS a reason.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

What about this rule:

"A miss can never reduce a creature to 0 or less hp."

This way, you can wear a creature down, but the killing blow must be a solid one. (Aka hit)

 

[Mort]

What about this rule:

"A miss can never reduce a creature to 0 or less hp."

This way, you can wear a creature down, but the killing blow must be a solid one. (Aka hit)

That's essentially the 4e solution against minions (never taking damage on a miss).

While overall I think it's a decent rule, in this context (the fighter reaper feat), I don't like it. The reaper theme is clearly meant to 1) mow down low powered creatures, or 2) finish off creatures once they get to low HPs on the fighter's turn without necessitating a hit.

You're suggestion robs the ability of both those purposes and makes it less than a boobie prize for the poor fighter.