D&D 5E Q&A 10/17/13 - Crits, Damage on Miss, Wildshape

[Aloïsius]

It's bad taste to hit a miss. What did the poor girl do to you anyway ?

 

[Mistwell]

Did anyone who has a problem with damage on a miss, have a similar problem with half damage on a miss from a variety of arcane spells in prior editions?

For example, fireball did half damage on a miss in third edition, unless you had the special Uncanny Dodge ability, in which case you could dodge the entire fireball even where someone with a higher Dexterity could not.

Did that cause similar issues with you? Or was it simply more believable that fire reaches between cracks in armor despite your dodging it (unless you have that special dodging ability), better than a sword wielded by someone with a special hitting ability?

 

[Morrus]

Did anyone who has a problem with damage on a miss, have a similar problem with half damage on a miss from a variety of arcane spells in prior editions?

For example, fireball did half damage on a miss in third edition, unless you had the special Uncanny Dodge ability, in which case you could dodge the entire fireball even where someone with a higher Dexterity could not.

Did that cause similar issues with you? Or was it simply more believable that fire reaches between cracks in armor despite your dodging it (unless you have that special dodging ability), better than a sword wielded by someone with a special hitting ability?

AoE stuff feels different to me.

 

[MJS]

Did anyone who has a problem with damage on a miss, have a similar problem with half damage on a miss from a variety of arcane spells in prior editions? For example, fireball did half damage on a miss in many prior editions, did that cause similar issues with you? Or was it simply more believable that fire reaches between cracks in armor despite your dodging it, better than a sword?

you're completely confusing the saving throw with an attack roll. Saving throw effects depend on the spell and circumstances (cover, etc.) And yes, area effect spells make sense in-game doing 1/2 damage on a successful save, particularly those spells with no to-hit roll -

The 5E rule is to make this available only to fighters who can find the special training for it. Personally, I wouldn't use it. I have better, more interesting ideas than "you always hit". But I will say, that since the 5E rule comes from the fighter seeking specialized training, it is a very easy mechanic to replace with something else, and indeed the WoTC developer says as much in the Q&A.

So, although I dislike the mechanic, I like the concept of fighters seeking out weapon masters throughout their careers, and the richness that adds to those characters. Entire adventure arcs ensue from this. Use whatever mechanics you like, Mentzer weapon mastery, stuff from other RPGs, or your own medieval weapons research inspired goodness.

 

[Tovec]

Did anyone who has a problem with damage on a miss, have a similar problem with half damage on a miss from a variety of arcane spells in prior editions?

I did. But there were a variety of reasons for it, as others have said, as it was an area effect. It wasn't damage on a miss ... on a attack vs. AC. It wasn't every round. And oh yeah, given that it was 3e - it cost you something.

For example, fireball did half damage on a miss in third edition, unless you had the special Uncanny Dodge ability, in which case you could dodge the entire fireball even where someone with a higher Dexterity could not.

You mean evasion. In 3e it was called evasion (later improved evasion). Uncanny dodge had to do with dodging sneak attacks. Also, AOE.

Did that cause similar issues with you? Or was it simply more believable that fire reaches between cracks in armor despite your dodging it (unless you have that special dodging ability), better than a sword wielded by someone with a special hitting ability?

I don't think anyone explained it that the fire somehow invaded the cracks in your full plate. Burned the exposed parts of your skin? Perhaps but not "into the cracks." Also, EVASION. Also, dodging behind cover gave you the same effect as evasion - so mechanically it still made sense.

As far as damage on a miss - no one else gets it, just a fighter specialty? How often can they do this? Is the explanation always going to be "I used my elbow?"

And for the record, I have always used every HIT to be a hit that deals actual damage/wounds to a creature. Even it is as minor as a scratch. That is what causes poison weapons to work, or damage reduction or any other countless things that hinge on HP. Saying that "it has always been hazy" does not make the explanation better - it makes it far worse. It says, "Hey this mechanic is already broken, as such I'm going to ram this unnecessary extra bit of brokenness into it and *crack* yeah, it fits see?" HP and AC don't make sense, so instead of trying to avoid making it not make sense, or trying to clean it up, or just trying to NOT emphasize it as much as possible they do the opposite and metagame (for lack of a better term) another bit into it that does just the opposite.

 

[Minigiant]

Personally, I liked damage on a miss in the older packets with fighters, ogres, and minotaurs all had it.

Back when it was "if the attack result was 10 or greater, deal X damage".

I'd be okay with an universal "Touch AC" of 10 for everyone. Then large creatures and great weapon users can hit this to deal Str mod damage.

 

[Warbringer]

For example, fireball did half damage on a miss in third edition, unless you had the special Uncanny Dodge ability, in which case you could dodge the entire fireball even where someone with a higher Dexterity could not.

Actually, but the reverse of not taking full damage. To be precise it annoyed the hell out of me that you "save" against an AoE by not actually doing anything, but simply standing in your square where here was no cover to begin!

That aside, HPs are the ultimate disassociated mechanic in the game, more so than AC. Attempting to explain a miss as "affecting meat" was a mistake, especially as worded, and [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION]'s suggestion is a far better explanation, though brings back multiple ACs (couldn't find anywhere in Next if "touch" is a keyword). Maybe just simply attacks that miss by 5 or less, then keep Touch AC for the advanced rules?

Other associated idea could have been your opponent is still "winded" by the attack and takes damage; your opponent in avoiding your main attack stumbles, injuring herself, as your elbow strikes her in the nose.... Etc

For those of us who ignore "all HP as meat", I guess we don't really care as long as he player has a fun narrative.

 

[Warbringer]

. Also, EVASION. Also, dodging behind cover gave you the same effect as evasion - so mechanically it still made sense.

You know, despite the text saying you must have "room to move" you never actually do! And besides, when that fireball explodes with its 20 ft radius (and that includes height) exactly where are you dodging to?

That said, once you let go of sim, its simply a narrative tool for the player of the rogue.

 

[Celebrim]

You know, despite the text saying you must have "room to move" you never actually do! And besides, when that fireball explodes with its 20 ft radius (and that includes height) exactly where are you dodging to?

Behind your shield, duck and cover, erecting a simple ward against fire to absorb some of the force, a quick whispered prayer to your patron causes the fire to largely slip around you...

 

[Warbringer]

Behind your shield, duck and cover, erecting a simple ward against fire to absorb some of the force, a quick whispered prayer to your patron causes the fire to largely slip around you...

All excellent narrative explanations, which I love, which is a fair enough reason for saves in general.

But Reflex is a "dodge" save, and rules wise i don't see a lot of dodging going one standing still in a 5' square, free action narratives notwithstanding.