Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6208530" data-attributes="member: 95493">See the 'immortal' example. There are many examples of creatures which should not be worn down - but through balance should probably still be hit by this ability. My route problem by the way has nothing to do with wearing down opponents. My issue has to do with doing so by not connecting a blow with them, the ensuing contradictions in existing mechanics, and the fact that this "hit" happens on a miss.Create an ability that somehow bypasses DR to always do minimum strength damage to the target. Fine, I'm on board.Create an ability that deals non-lethal damage to a creature in certain circumstances (say the line above this one.): Again, I don't see a problem as long as you hit.Ensure that ALL of the restrictions on that list are followed (can't kill people, can't still hit on a 1, etc.) AND make it non-lethal - and then you are starting to approach what you are currently describing pemerton.I surprisingly didn't see your answer of how this ability interacts with uncrittable creatures, damage reduction, poison, high DEX AC creatures, and so on - that I've been asking for for PAGES already. I suppose, I probably shouldn't have expected it.As you WELL know, my knowledge does not reside in 4e. And to the best of my knowledge 13th age has not been picked up by WotC or given the Dungeons and Dragons brand to incorporate it to be a full DnD product either.No, I'm arguing through what I know of 3e and 5e mechanics as they exist. I'm not dealing with another system's responses (13th age). And try to avoid bringing up examples of 4e whenever I can. (And for the record, whenever I provide a solution from PF I do my best to make sure people know it is PF's and not 3e's.)So, by the existing rules of 5e - many of which are carbon copies of 3e, so say many 4e supporters - do not support this special snowflake status of an ability.Further, given the other mechanics that I have repeatedly given you, and the 'immortal' one given after my last post, have already been established and have clearly understood implications in the game.For example, we know that some damage must be physical on every HIT because otherwise poisoned weapons wouldn't work. Or rather otherwise they would work on a miss - which they don't in my knowledge. Under that premise, which has been in play since 1e - given Celebrim's quoting - I have to assume 5e is partially physical on a HIT. On a MISS? Well now they're saying that on a miss of any degree, be that 1 under AC or a 1 on the roll (and let's further say a +0 to the roll?).. is still a hit because it bruises, tires, wounds, etc. the target. It doesn't make sense.Go back and read Rodney's description (from the article), "we like to think of it as the fighter character striking the body of the  target, and the armor (or hide) absorbing the brunt of the damage, but  not all of it." That is what Damage Reduction is modeled on. If WotC wants to make better armor reduce damage on a blow they need to change how AC is calculated to make armor add to DR instead of AC. As it is, this description DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. So long as you continue to have armor makes you harder to hit, and does NOT reduce damage of an attack - this ability does not work as described.So, no I don't know 4e or 13th ages description. But show me in 5e rules where this works the way described. And while you are at it, please show me how it hits the immortal who doesn't get tired. And how it is meant to work with damage reduction, and AC (wearing better full plate OR having a better DEX), and with poison, and so on and on and on.I'm getting tired of being told I'm wrong without being proven it.</blockquote>

Verification