Quote from: Batman;768341The way I see it is Hit =/= Contact and Miss =/= Whiff. A Hit is like in Baseball where I hit the ball and it lands somewhere in play and I get to run to the base. I can smack the ball ALL day long and foul 1,000,000 times but none of contact is an actual "hit". So in D&D a Hit with a Martial Weapon is when you succeed in equaling or exceeding a target number. That's the game's definition. Not the literal meaning of "hit" as in, I made contact with something.

Granted it's ALL subjective and people will flavor their favorite position on the issue, and I also feel it IS an issue D&D has grappled with since it's inception. The rules, til 4E, however kept things pretty ambiguous. 4E's Reaping Strike sort of let the Couatl out of the bag so to speak and now we're dealing with the differences that have always been there.

But I have to fully admit that it doesn't matter because I'll be running D&D:Next with Wounds and Vitality system, so there's a much clearer definition of how something like DoaM works in conjunction with a term like "Vitality" and how that doesn't  translate over to "Wounds" (something DoaM could never do because the attack was a "miss").

I shall be using a W/V system also and likely slower healing. I prefer it to be grittier then the baseline. But big magic and badass fighters that hurt when they hit anything, armor included.

Quote from: Marleycat;768343fi
I shall be using a W/V system also and likely slower healing. I prefer it to be grittier then the baseline. But big magic and badass fighters that hurt when they hit anything, armor included.

I'd like to do grittier but I don't think my other players would. They do put a lot of time and investment into their characters so when death looms or is achieved, they go back to the drawing board. It was funny when I suggested we go with Healing Surges are equal to 1/2 level + Constitution (....and the rage ensued).

Luckily 5E is pretty simple in char-gen area and I could always tell them to bring a few extra characters.

Quote from: Batman;768345I'd like to do grittier but I don't think my other players would. They do put a lot of time and investment into their characters so when death looms or is achieved, they go back to the drawing board. It was funny when I suggested we go with Healing Surges are equal to 1/2 level + Constitution (....and the rage ensued).

Luckily 5E is pretty simple in char-gen area and I could always tell them to bring a few extra characters.

Not a crazy idea. My group like myself, like horror games over baseline Dnd so the buy in is pretty low.

Quote from: honesttiago;768315Depending on how you interpret hp's that glancing blow you describe, above, is the fluff text for a hit, not a miss.

This is the key bit. When a 2 handed sword does 3 damage its because it was a glancing blow that you took on your shield.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768357This is the key bit. When a 2 handed sword does 3 damage its because it was a glancing blow that you took on your shield.

Not necessarily. You can describe a miss that does no damage the exact same way. DoaM is a freebie with the same fluff.  Plus that "miss" is STILL a hit, in this case, a hit on the shield. The idea that someone telegraphing a big swing that no one can dodge is bullshit. It's not a hand grenade.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768357This is the key bit. When a 2 handed sword does 3 damage its because it was a glancing blow that you took on your shield.

Not necessarily. You can describe a miss that does no damage the exact same way. DoaM is a freebie with the same fluff.  Plus that "miss" is STILL a hit, in this case, a hit on the shield. The idea that some telegraphing a big swing that no one can dodge is bullshit. It's not a hand grenade. If we're going to allow for getting fatigued by defending yourself successfully, then EVERY round of combat should cost hp's.

Quote from: cranebump;768402Not necessarily. You can describe a miss that does no damage the exact same way. DoaM is a freebie with the same fluff.  Plus that "miss" is STILL a hit, in this case, a hit on the shield. The idea that some telegraphing a big swing that no one can dodge is bullshit. It's not a hand grenade. If we're going to allow for getting fatigued by defending yourself successfully, then EVERY round of combat should cost hp's.

Bit confused ..... That miss is a hit. A blow you can't dodge is bullshit but a miss should deal damage?

I agree that a more realistic combat model would have a fatigue cost for each round of combat and different options would carry different costs but that is a very complex model that can really only be run on say a computer game.

You do get fatigued in D&D for defending yourself that is exactly how HPs work. I hit you with my big fuck off sword and rather than loosing an arm you loose a proportion of your abstract HPs, which increase as you gain experience so can't be "meat" unless gaining experience also means getting bigger or what not.

Damage on a miss? When did people actually lose the ability to duck under or jump over a blow?

Quote from: Bren;768517Damage on a miss? When did people actually lose the ability to duck under or jump over a blow?

They didn't, it's listed in the Disengage + move away actions for D&D:Next. But if your gonna go toe to toe with a dude wielding 4+ ft. of steel at you then your probably gonna have a hard time leaping and dodging that weapon (telegraphed or not) OR you don't view HP in a "meat only" way. The guy missed your AC, failing to succed on a substantial blow but the attack drove you to dodge, dip, duck, dive, and....dodge which causes HP loss.

The differences are how one views HP and its relation to the literal (or gamist) way in which people perceive "hit" and "miss". In the context of DoaM, a lot of people think Miss is an actual "whiff" and they like to narrate most attacks that way. Others think "miss" is just a gamist way of saying "your attack was not sufficient in dealing any significant damage" but could be narrated by the weapon being turned by a shield or armor or a glancing blow.

The biggest problem I've found with the DoaM debate is the angst and vitriol that has been spewed at people for liking or disliking the mechanic. This was FAR worse than the rule actually making it or being removed from the game. Most "normal" people probably wouldn't be bothered by the decision either way.

The stupid thing about DoaM was that it was simply applied to an entire class of weapon.  Sufficiently trained with a two-handed weapon, it is impossible for you to reach a level of performance with it that every other weapon has.  

Every other weapon allows for you to make such a poor attack that it doesn't affect your opponent at all.  No hitting shields, no dodge necessary, no HP loss, it was just an incompetent attack.  Give me a larger weapon and by virtue of size, now, I can no longer be that incompetent.

It's like any WotC rule, might be a good idea, but little to no thought behind the surface mechanical adjustment.

You put in Wounds/Vitality/Stamina, now it starts to makes more sense, but still is ridiculous if it's binary and not subject to how well you roll.

What's naked armor class without any dex, 10.  So if you didn't hit a 10, you outright miss no matter what.  Not very hard.  At the end of combat, if you were in melee, lose 1 hp.  Again, not very hard, and I'm sure we'll see some stuff like this in the GM's guide.

It just comes down to staying at the same zoom level and not going to a finer level of detail for a single type of weapon.

Sorry for all the angst  and vitriol. :rolleyes:

You know, I don't really have an issue with it.

A lot of people do.  And that's fine.

It's also very linked in many people's minds to 4e, and one of the more contentious bits of it.

So I agree with WotC in removing it.  The good it added (flavor for a weapon class) can be done in many other ways that are less contentious.

Quote from: CRKrueger;768578The stupid thing about DoaM was that it was simply applied to an entire class of weapon.  Sufficiently trained with a two-handed weapon, it is impossible for you to reach a level of performance with it that every other weapon has.  

Every other weapon allows for you to make such a poor attack that it doesn't affect your opponent at all.  No hitting shields, no dodge necessary, no HP loss, it was just an incompetent attack.  Give me a larger weapon and by virtue of size, now, I can no longer be that incompetent.

It has nothing to do with competence. It's simply that a 4+ ft. of steel or wood will generate MUCH more force because your swinging it with two-hands that avoiding the blow by throwing your shield into it OR it glancing off your armor still hurts OR if you use the HP = meat + other things ideal that avoiding the weapon takes a portion of your stamina + luck + blah blah stuff to avoid being hit.

Quote from: CRKrueger;768578It's like any WotC rule, might be a good idea, but little to no thought behind the surface mechanical adjustment.

The fact that you don't like it does not mean that there was no thought put into it. The fact that many people seem fine with it AND the fact that it's been in the playtest for the ENTIRE time shows that a good portion of the fan-base was OK with it's existence and found that it's inclusion wasn't a bad thing.

Obviously it's received negative feedback as well, thus the change in the Basic PDF. That, however, doesn't mean we'll see something akin to it later down the road (or people just adding it in anyways).

Quote from: CRKrueger;768578You put in Wounds/Vitality/Stamina, now it starts to makes more sense, but still is ridiculous if it's binary and not subject to how well you roll.

What's naked armor class without any dex, 10.  So if you didn't hit a 10, you outright miss no matter what.  Not very hard.  At the end of combat, if you were in melee, lose 1 hp.  Again, not very hard, and I'm sure we'll see some stuff like this in the GM's guide.

It just comes down to staying at the same zoom level and not going to a finer level of detail for a single type of weapon.

Sorry for all the angst  and vitriol. :rolleyes:

No, this is an actual discussion about the concept. If I wanted to read angst and vitriol, I'd pull up some WotC threads or the ones over on RPG.net. Basically what it does is put a focus on how people narrate the loss of HP and how they describe the combat scene. DoaM limits, to a degree, how they can flavor and describe the scene to make narrative sense without saying "um....magic."

Now you mention AC 10 (no modifiers) and the guy missing someone with that AC. Good example. Personally I've always viewed HP as a combination of crap and someone who has an AC 10 (or someone without armor) that goes up against DoaM is dodging, diving, dipping, ducking, and dodging out of the way of the blade narrowly missing them. Because of this, they're not paying attention to the scrapes and bruises they're receiving from hitting the ground in a roll or straining their muscles to duck out of the way at the last second. But all of this sort of flies out the window when someone actually think about gaining HP by receiving experience. What just happened when my Fighter reached another level and got 8 HP? He didn't just get fatter or grow more meat or his body didn't just metaphysically change to be able to absorb a sword's blade better.

Quote from: Batman;768604It has nothing to do with competence. It's simply that a 4+ ft. of steel or wood will generate MUCH more force because your swinging it with two-hands that avoiding the blow by throwing your shield into it OR it glancing off your armor still hurts OR if you use the HP = meat + other things ideal that avoiding the weapon takes a portion of your stamina + luck + blah blah stuff to avoid being hit.



The fact that you don't like it does not mean that there was no thought put into it. The fact that many people seem fine with it AND the fact that it's been in the playtest for the ENTIRE time shows that a good portion of the fan-base was OK with it's existence and found that it's inclusion wasn't a bad thing.
.

Could you imagine a guy with a sword swinging and missing? is there a circumstance where you swing and for whatever reason you simply miss? In this situation why would the target loose HP?

Now if we take HP as not meat (and its the only logical position really) then when you swing at me and hit I use my HP to negate the "wound" damge and take it as bruise, stamina loss etc. This is how HPs seem to function and you see it in subtext right back from 1e's attacks against helpless foes etc.
In this case then HPs actually represent my ability to deflect/avoid/dodge your blow with the implication that I don't need to do that if you miss.
This is why DoaM is such a big deal because it breaks that explicit relationship between an attack and its result.

Now as noted if you wanted to change HPs to be a full on fatigue mechanic such that your guard, the armour you wear and the weapon you weild each have a cost in HPs to use, so fighting agressively with a Two handed sword might cost you 3 HP per round or 4 in Plate armour, whereas fighting defensively with twin lightweight handaxes might cost you 1HP a round in fatigue. In that case then you might say that the "flurry of blows" special attack imposes a default HP loss to your opponent (although it will cost you as HP as well) whether you land a blow or not, although I would prefer to say if you chose not to expend the HP the attack would receive a large bonus to hit.
However, that is not how D&D works. There is no fatigue for climbing a rope in plate armour there is no HP loss for carrying your max capacity up a 40% incline for 2 hours.
I think there is a valid mechanic in there where HPs protect your meat (as wounds) and also act as a generic fatigue pool the result being a really tired guy is easier to hit and hurt than a fresh guy and wearing hot heavy armour in an underground maze for days is likely to slow you down some, but its not D&D, well not this or any previous iteration.

Im going to interpret it one way and maybee it works maybee it doesnt.
Someone else is going to go the diametric opposite and adamantly believe it cannot ever work. EVER.
Another will look at it and totally see how it makes perfect sense.

What else is new?

Quote from: jibbajibba;768612Could you imagine a guy with a sword swinging and missing? is there a circumstance where you swing and for whatever reason you simply miss? In this situation why would the target loose HP?

Sure, though why did I miss is something that would be questioned. But yes, a "whiff" is something that could happen. The target I'm swinging at could have dodged out of the way or dropped to his heels and tumbled out of nearly getting cleaved. These evasions, however, take a toll (however slightly) on the body and thus, lose HP. It also takes the idea that HP is something other than just 'meat'.

Now can you explain why a character gains HP after earning experience? How does one frame that growth? If someone can gain HP through experience AND not because they've obtained more meat or their body has undergone a metaphysical altered state then why must they lose HP in a way other than taking damage?  

Quote from: jibbajibba;768612Now if we take HP as not meat (and its the only logical position really) then when you swing at me and hit I use my HP to negate the "wound" damage and take it as bruise, stamina loss etc. This is how HPs seem to function and you see it in subtext right back from 1e's attacks against helpless foes etc.

I've never read it like that. When I hit you with my sword, I'm dealing wounds. Your not using your HP to negate the attack or avoid serious damage but taking a cut. Now one can narrate the cut as minor or a scratch or whatever but the character isn't "using" HP to avoid the damage.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768612In this case then HPs actually represent my ability to deflect/avoid/dodge your blow with the implication that I don't need to do that if you miss.
This is why DoaM is such a big deal because it breaks that explicit relationship between an attack and its result.

I don't think it breaks any explicit relationship, I just think it paints the narrative of combat into a small box. If someone is using DoaM then they're likely to narrate a miss as either the weapon banging off a shield, banging off someone's armor piece or the "miss" only missed in dealing a considerable amount of damage in likely just grazed the target.

Obviously some people want more freedom with their narration OR find ways in which this ability can completely ruin their campaign (such examples is where I encountered the vitriol and angst).

What DoaM does, like Inspiration Healing, is put an narrow focus on HOW the person narrates the situation. With DoaM the attacker doesn't "whiff" or with Inspiration Healing, the attacks are mostly superfluous and can be restored with an encouraging shout.

Some people are cool with this, some aren't.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768612Now as noted if you wanted to change HPs to be a full on fatigue mechanic such that your guard, the armour you wear and the weapon you wield each have a cost in HPs to use, so fighting aggressively with a Two handed sword might cost you 3 HP per round or 4 in Plate armour, whereas fighting defensively with twin lightweight handaxes might cost you 1HP a round in fatigue. In that case then you might say that the "flurry of blows" special attack imposes a default HP loss to your opponent (although it will cost you as HP as well) whether you land a blow or not, although I would prefer to say if you chose not to expend the HP the attack would receive a large bonus to hit.
However, that is not how D&D works. There is no fatigue for climbing a rope in plate armour there is no HP loss for carrying your max capacity up a 40% incline for 2 hours.

That sounds like a LOT of work to make this mechanic happen. Instead, I just use Vitality and Wounds from the SRD. Vitality is a pretty loose term that can be applied to a LOT of scenarios without having the imagery infringed upon. DoaM removes your "vitality" because of X. I don't think too hard on the terms "hit" or "miss" because the loss of "vitality" is vague and can be applied generally. Wounds, however, does create an imagery and it should be severe. A sword cut that drops vitality isn't terrible or even that bad. A sword gash from a critical attack has injured you greatly (thus, Wound).  Personally, I think it's the best way to go OVERALL with D&D, but people are really tied to their sacred cows that such things are always an "alternative module".

Quote from: jibbajibba;768612I think there is a valid mechanic in there where HPs protect your meat (as wounds) and also act as a generic fatigue pool the result being a really tired guy is easier to hit and hurt than a fresh guy and wearing hot heavy armour in an underground maze for days is likely to slow you down some, but its not D&D, well not this or any previous iteration.

Granted, though what "is D&D" is highly subjective. I don't think Dwarven Women with beards is "D&D" and prefer them with elaborate and long Braids that they focus on however I accept that people hold to things like dwarven bearded women or Vancian Spellcasting.