Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Refactoring DOAM
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tomBitonti" data-source="post: 6273059" data-attributes="member: 13107"><p>Interesting. I myself find the second case clearer, with an interpretation of "the attack is so tenacious and threatening that a major effort is required to avoid a serious blow." Then, the major effort required means that damage is applied even on a miss.</p><p></p><p>That is, I'm thinking of the the DOAM amount as representing a baseline / minimal effort required when engaged by the attacker, and the DOAH amount represents extra damage when the attacker was able to push past defenses and (depending on the interpretation of a hit) score a blow / cause extra effort / use up some of the defender's luck.</p><p></p><p>I do see that having just one damage amount applied (either the DOAM X or the DOAH Y amount) is much simpler than having <em>either</em> one or two damage amounts (either the DOAM X amount or both the DOAM X amount and the DOAH Y - X amount), and is simpler because a DOAH Y - X amount will be constrained to what is easy to calculate.</p><p></p><p>But, even though I prefer the case 2 interpretation, I get into a tangle with it, because, if fighters can have <em>Implacable</em> attacks, I wonder whether there should be other attackers that have this ability. But, if only fighters can get the ability, this seems to be truly an exception case, and I find these to be distasteful when they don't have a good reasoning behind their existence.</p><p></p><p>Looking at several existing 3E continuous damage cases: Being on fire; standing next to a wall of fire, the reasoning is different than for DOAM. Also, the actual existing case of DOAM, that is, an attack with a grenade-like weapon, which applies splash damage on a near miss, has a different reasoning. DOAM seems to be truly a new case.</p><p></p><p>Comparing this with sneak attack dice and with critical hits (both using 3E as a background), I don't find that I have the same problem with these mechanics. You could replace sneak attack dice with an increased critical hit chance, but that doesn't seem to work mechanically as well as sneak attack. The conditions for when to apply sneak attack dice fit the flavor very well. Perhaps critical hits should have been based on the amount the attack exceeds AC, but that moves the excitement from the player to the DM, and adds fiddly details which would slow down combat. Critical hits do have scaling problems -- caused, I think, by poorly thought out feats -- but still, critical hits work pretty well.</p><p></p><p>Thx!</p><p></p><p>TomB</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tomBitonti, post: 6273059, member: 13107"] Interesting. I myself find the second case clearer, with an interpretation of "the attack is so tenacious and threatening that a major effort is required to avoid a serious blow." Then, the major effort required means that damage is applied even on a miss. That is, I'm thinking of the the DOAM amount as representing a baseline / minimal effort required when engaged by the attacker, and the DOAH amount represents extra damage when the attacker was able to push past defenses and (depending on the interpretation of a hit) score a blow / cause extra effort / use up some of the defender's luck. I do see that having just one damage amount applied (either the DOAM X or the DOAH Y amount) is much simpler than having [i]either[/i] one or two damage amounts (either the DOAM X amount or both the DOAM X amount and the DOAH Y - X amount), and is simpler because a DOAH Y - X amount will be constrained to what is easy to calculate. But, even though I prefer the case 2 interpretation, I get into a tangle with it, because, if fighters can have [i]Implacable[/i] attacks, I wonder whether there should be other attackers that have this ability. But, if only fighters can get the ability, this seems to be truly an exception case, and I find these to be distasteful when they don't have a good reasoning behind their existence. Looking at several existing 3E continuous damage cases: Being on fire; standing next to a wall of fire, the reasoning is different than for DOAM. Also, the actual existing case of DOAM, that is, an attack with a grenade-like weapon, which applies splash damage on a near miss, has a different reasoning. DOAM seems to be truly a new case. Comparing this with sneak attack dice and with critical hits (both using 3E as a background), I don't find that I have the same problem with these mechanics. You could replace sneak attack dice with an increased critical hit chance, but that doesn't seem to work mechanically as well as sneak attack. The conditions for when to apply sneak attack dice fit the flavor very well. Perhaps critical hits should have been based on the amount the attack exceeds AC, but that moves the excitement from the player to the DM, and adds fiddly details which would slow down combat. Critical hits do have scaling problems -- caused, I think, by poorly thought out feats -- but still, critical hits work pretty well. Thx! TomB [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Refactoring DOAM
Top