• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E Replacing Damage-On-A-Miss

But many D&D fans hate this and many Anti-"FanNam" mechanics have popped up in the past few editions (higher starting UP, healing during rests, recovery of resources during rest, recovery of resources on failure "Reliable powers", damage on saves/misses, increased accuracy, etc)
Very sad. If combat isn't war, it isn't combat; it's something else. Not sure what.
Should low level D&D be "stack up advantages or avoid the obstacle at all cost"?
Sure, why not?
Because if it is, great weapons are useless until high levels as you must put yourself in dangerous situations just to use them.

If it is not, then how do we make great weapon users not suicidal?
By stacking the advantages and using decent tactics such that when the 2h-sword guy wades in he's been set up to succeed as best the party is able.

Sending him in without support - well, one way or another at least the combat will be short...but note this should also be true for any warrior type. 2-handed weapons have always been a high-risk high-reward proposition, but I wonder if the reward side has been reduced too much over time. (in 1e a 2h-sword did 3d6 vs. a large opponent, for example, which made it a very real choice - if risky - against giants and so forth)

Lanefan
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Very sad. If combat isn't war, it isn't combat; it's something else. Not sure what.
Sure, why not?
By stacking the advantages and using decent tactics such that when the 2h-sword guy wades in he's been set up to succeed as best the party is able.


Not always given time to make combat a war. And as a DM, I always felt limited with low level D&D because of the amount of outs and advantages I have to toss out.


Lanefan;6266770 said:
Sending him in without support - well, one way or another at least the combat will be short...but note this should also be true for any warrior type. 2-handed weapons have always been a high-risk high-reward proposition, but I wonder if the reward side has been reduced too much over time. (in 1e a 2h-sword did 3d6 vs. a large opponent, for example, which made it a very real choice - if risky - against giants and so forth)


Lanefan



Tovec said:
I don't see why we are rewarding failure. It is as if rogues got the secondary effect of improved evasion (but without the "evasion part they already had") and took half damage on every single reflex save, success or failure. Why is it necessary? I'll get to what you say more about this later.




I think that what is getting lost here is that you also need to understand why it doesn't work in order to replace it.


You have a problem with the frequency of misses. This ability does not solve that, it just gives you freebie points for trying. Those freebie points also happen to have the added effect of breaking soo many people's suspension of disbelief. In addition, as I said earlier, I don't believe in rewarding the failure. I don't see why they should get better next round for missing this round. A long time ago (in one of the many past threads) I said that if it was a concentrated attack of some kind, where they steadied and readied an attack and it went wrong (thinking of something like a precise arrow shot or something) then I could understand giving them a bonus to the attack for next time. Heavy weapons kind of work the other way, they are unwieldy.


Now, I'm not opposed to making fighters better on the front end so they miss less often, but DOAM and all solutions I've seen thus far DO NOT boost their attack to avoid missing more often. (I may have missed one or two, so if it has been proposed direct me to it.) My ideal solution is to stop DOAM'ing and give them a better bonus to attack, in-line with the king of all combatants. Failing that, if they want to use the description already in the playtest packet (about an attack so brutal) then rewrite the ability so it DOES THAT. Have it bypass DR in some fashion. But the major problem is they are playing around with the ambiguity of the armor as AC (instead of as DR, as it should be for this ability) and it breaks my mind and makes the game less fun by simply existing. Even the solutions I've seen here that I dislike (like the aura) do this less than the way WotC has chosen to screw around with AC in their own system.[/sblock]


I really don't care what they do to make great weapons useable and fun really.
But I hope it boosts damage and isn't so niche that picking its style as obviously suboptimal.


Although somewhat boring and rewarding failure, EAoaM gives GWF a point while remaining balanced and offensively minded.
 

Not always given time to make combat a war. And as a DM, I always felt limited with low level D&D because of the amount of outs and advantages I have to toss out.

Outs and advantages are for the players to discover and use. It is otherwise known as playing the game. I don't know what makes you think that they have to be tossed out like party favors.
 

I really don't care what they do to make great weapons useable and fun really.
But I hope it boosts damage and isn't so niche that picking its style as obviously suboptimal.
Why not just straight-up boost the damage done by a great weapon when it hits? For example instead of a greatsword doing 2d6 make it 3d4 (higher average) or 2d8 or even 3d6. That way there's more potential reward to mitigate the risk of lowering your AC.

Nice side-effect here for nasty DMs is that great weapons used by the enemy would similarly have their damage jumped up - giants for the win!

Lan-"I'd like to commission a +5 defender greatsword, please"-efan
 

Outs and advantages are for the players to discover and use. It is otherwise known as playing the game. I don't know what makes you think that they have to be tossed out like party favors.

There's no need to "toss them out like party favors". But DMs create the world. If a DM doesn't actually put feature, on purpose or not, there is nothing to take advantage of for players. This is very dangerous at low levels when the game tolerate very few mistakes. And a noticeable percentage of fans dislike this.

Why not just straight-up boost the damage done by a great weapon when it hits? For example instead of a greatsword doing 2d6 make it 3d4 (higher average) or 2d8 or even 3d6. That way there's more potential reward to mitigate the risk of lowering your AC.

Nice side-effect here for nasty DMs is that great weapons used by the enemy would similarly have their damage jumped up - giants for the win!

Lan-"I'd like to commission a +5 defender greatsword, please"-efan

Adding 1d6 to the damage might do it.

Only thing I would worry about is fans complaining about Next introducing late 3rd edition rocket tag gameplay. You can't win. D&D's fanbase is large and diverse.

---
That's why designing for Next is so hard. Almost every decision angers a noticeable amount of the base. Add in good game design techniques and actual resource management and you have a nightmare.
 

There's no need to "toss them out like party favors". But DMs create the world. If a DM doesn't actually put feature, on purpose or not, there is nothing to take advantage of for players. This is very dangerous at low levels when the game tolerate very few mistakes. And a noticeable percentage of fans dislike this.

Low level is dangerous for a reason. It teaches players to think before charging in, which is a lesson that remains valuable at higher levels when dealing with things that would be suicidal to take head on. Experienced players can skip the levels where PCs are so fragile if it doesn't appeal to them.
 



The refrain would be, then, don't play first level characters. If you want to be world-beaters, play world-beaters. That's the whole point of having level-based advancement, isn't it?
Sure, that's fine. I don't mind low-level characters being fragile, I just don't want to play in that manner. My own non-4e games rarely start at a level lower than 4th.
 

I've disputed the premise that DoaM is an incoherent concept within the mechanics of D&D (specifically with respect to the target number of AC which is a - well understood - conflation of dodge and force of impact dispersal/mitigation) many times in other threads.

Beyond that, I utterly dispute that the concept of DoaM is an incoherent concept in physical martial exchanges in real life. A Running Back performing a blitz pickup of an Outside Linebacker coming on a rush is entering into a physical martial exchange akin to a melee skirmish. The Running Back is attempting to successfully interpose himself between the blitzer and the QB, attacking the blitzer with proper technique (deliver the blow, hands inside the shoulders and under the numbers, anchoring his position by lowering his pad level and dropping his hips for leverage). The Running Back here whiffs at his primary block attempt. His technique is poor and he is flat out beat to the edge. What does he do? What plenty of guys do when they're beat in the frenzy of a melee skirmish. He instinctively flails wildly. His flailing causes the defender to take evasive action to avoid the (illegal) legwhip. He hits the deck hard and is prone.

Damage (and an afflicted condition - prone) on a (proverbial) "Miss". The frenzy of martial exchanges are rife with these sorts of examples. Guys getting injured (tearing an ACL, spraining an ankle, or simply winding themselves in the sprawl to avoid) by taking evasive action when dealing with a flailing, off-balance opponent who fails in their offensive flurry. The number of times I've seen, or been involved with, incidental, collateral damage having a huge (if not decisive) effect on a martial exchange is huge; from football, to basketball, to actual physical combat. It doesn't even have to be actual injury from trying to evade a flail. It could be just the exhaustive wear and tear of sprawling to avoid a takedown attempt or a tackle or trying to split defenders when you're going to the rim in basketball. Avoiding contact (especially takedowns) is extremely fatiguing. Fatigue makes your concentration wane and causes your muscle memory response to have a higher propensity for failure. Its demoralizing. It breaks up the honed, subconscious OODA Loop that you would have developed in the respective discipline you are plying. Being tired is a thousand times worse than the pain of a tweaked ankle.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that DoaM is probably the closest D&D has come to actually simulating the process of a martial exchange. Every exchange causes you some kind of wear and tear, be it physical, fatigue, or mental, leaving you more susceptible for failure on the next exchange.

Yeah, you're still not getting your point across to me. I say we call it a day.

But riddle me this, does EVERY time the attacker does this trigger an ACL wound in the defender? DOAM does. No margin of error, no crit fails.

*attempts to disappear into ether again*
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top