Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6318882" data-attributes="member: 95493">Didn't see these replies before I started my last response. This thread went and grew legs all of a sudden.And during 4e's reign it was often criticized that 4e had turned everyone into spellcasters, I wonder why. Also, since Crothian seemed to say his group gave up on 4e I don't know why you would be giving such things as an argument of good things in a 5e thread.There was a lot of flack over reaping strike too. Just do a google search and you can see them. Many of the arguments about it, even from 4e fans, resembled arguments like we are having now about 5e's DoaM. Hardly a good thing either.Something that is solely missing in the 5e write up. Not the least of what it is missing mind you, since the power is poorly written and poorly thought out and generally poorly received. But yes, multiple cases of not taking the thing that currently ALWAYS damages people on a MISS? Yeah, that would be an improvement.Then you either haven't been paying attention or haven't been looking. Go google it. This isn't even a "4e is bad because look its X number of years later and we have 5e." I'm just saying that while it may not have exploded the same way in the 4e days, it was still an issue with a grand number of people - but people who disliked 4e usually disliked it for other reasons too. Goes back to my comments about 13th age - we don't care because we weren't buying it to start with.I would also point out pemerton, that even if (big IF) it weren't an issue in 4e that means nothing for 5e and its more inclusive attempt to gather a fanbase. What worked for 4e won't necessarily work for 5e. 5e is a different beast entirely. I can't and wouldn't advocate the broken design of 3e, for example - in fact I think that 5e probably hasn't gone far enough in fixing its magic.Do you have any more information, possibly a link, on this subject? I personally can't respond to Roger Musson's comments from 30 years ago sight unseen. He may have been brilliant or me hay have been talking out of his butt. I can't say and so I don't, personally, find this a compelling argument.Gunslingers in general, and guns in general, aren't very good examples for Pathfinder I'm sorry to say. They are no more similar to damage on a miss than wizard's fireball. Beyond that, I know countless games outright ban them, or modify the system when they do allow guns/lingers. It is the very definition of an optional module to a highly modular game. Given that, if DoaM were modular then it would be far more acceptable. But as far as the mechanic goes (I never said I wouldn't criticize the ability) in order to "damage on a miss" the gunslinger has to spend a resource - unlike the 5e power. This already means they can't do it all day long, already puts it into a category closer to spells, already means that they aren't killing EVERY kobold on a miss. Oh and don't forget the fact that it only does half of what it would have done, so not necessarily killing the kobold every time they miss, but half of what they would have done normally. So, I'd say there are far better and more debatable versions of DoaM in PF. This is a weak example, IMHO.</blockquote>

Verification