D&D 5E Would you be happy with fixed damage?

[Todd Roybark]

I like average damage. Rolling 22 damage on my 18d6 Fireball spell in 1e, soured some of the old school charm for me.

I also play a fair amount of Cypher system RPGs...which has fixed damage based off weapon type: Light, Medium, Heavy.
As long as there is a mechanism for players to expend a resource to increase the average damage..I think it is fine, and speeds up the game.

 

[Tonguez]

Nope. The problem with fixed damage is that nothing is unknown. I knew a jerk in 3E who used shuriken, which dealt exactly 1 damage with 3 attacks per round, as a way of picking off the wounded. He'd memorized all the monsters HP, knowing that the DM used the average for convenience. He'd switch to them when an enemy was within only 1 or 2 HP, picking them off with ease.

um, so whats wrong with that? IO assume he was playing a ninja type - a skilled martial artist who has learnt to assess when an opponent is weak and the shuriken will be most effective.

No.
That is big part of the fun for me, the random element. Taking it away for either players or monsters would ruin the game for me.

You still get the ranfom element on the Attack rollm damage is just FX

for mooks I dont use damage at all just hits (if the atatck succeeds the victim loses HD)

 

[Li Shenron]

If there was a campaign where weapons dealt fixed damage, e.g a dagger did 3+STR/DEX points of damage, a greatsword did 7+STR, etc. Would you be happy? Would it take away from the fun of rolling damage for you? Or would you be content if it sped up play?

I really like the traditional randomness of rolling damage dice... I certainly wouldn't walk away from a table just because they used fixed damage, but it's part of the fun to see when you roll max or otherwise 1, and I don't think removing the rolls would speed up the game that much.

 

[CubicsRube]

What problem would it be solving?

Who said it's solving a problem?

 

[CubicsRube]

If rolling a die slows the game down that much I think you have other problems.

If you're replying to me, I didn't say it did slow the game down at all.

 

[CubicsRube]

Nope. The problem with fixed damage is that nothing is unknown. I knew a jerk in 3E who used shuriken, which dealt exactly 1 damage with 3 attacks per round, as a way of picking off the wounded. He'd memorized all the monsters HP, knowing that the DM used the average for convenience. He'd switch to them when an enemy was within only 1 or 2 HP, picking them off with ease.

True, although that might work for some people.

However, I can and do frequently use different HP for monsters within their range in the Monster Manual.

 

[CubicsRube]

No need to fix damage.

It isn't broken.

Never said I was trying to fix it. Please don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Lanefan]

Never said I was trying to fix it. Please don't put words in my mouth.

Another joke, missed...

Ah, well.

 

[CubicsRube]

Another joke, missed...

Ah, well.

Wasn't funny. Sorry

 

[FrogReaver]

Honestly, using average damage but the DM rolling for monster hp would be faster than rolling for damage and using average monster hp.

I could see it speeding up play a little.