Quote from: Batman;768629Sure, 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?  




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.



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.



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".



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.

I agree. Then again I play FantasyCraft which uses a vitality/wounds system (your CON are wounds the per level stuff is vitality) coupled with armour as DR and a spellpoint magic system with multilevel feats. Seems very doable in 5e yes?

Quote from: Batman;768528But 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...

Not if the dude is significantly less skilled than my character.

The notion that big weapons always force a loss of hit points and smaller weapons doesn't seem at all reasonable (nor appealing). But if you want to start tracking HP loss for dodging and leaping than you should also track HP loss for fatigue from swinging a 4+ ft piece of steel instead of a 12" piece of steel or for fighting while wearing and carrying 60 lbs. of armor and gear instead of 10 lbs. of gear.

QuoteThe 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.

Or the guy just plain wiffed and hit the wall or a tree instead of my PC. DoaM seems to assume that can never, ever occur.

QuoteThe 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.

Not sure what point you are trying to make about narration. If one doesn't use DoaM the two narrations are functionally the same (no HPs lost) and I have always seen both used by DMs/GMs when no damage accrues on a miss. A roll close to a hit would likely get the blocked by shield narration, whereas a roll far from a hit would get the whiff narration.

QuoteThe 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.

Meh. Most normal people don't play RPGs.

Actual medieval armour never weighed more then 20-30 pounds if that. Much like actual heavy weaponry wasn't more then 3-5 pounds. Why else would anybody actually use it.

Quote from: Batman;768629Sure, 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'.

Again I am not saying the target moved I am saying can you imagine just missing. It seems like you can't.
I have played around with weapons for years and it is possible to miss a tree stump that isn't moving at all.

QuoteNow 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?  

Um ... from my explanation its obvious they develop a larger range of skills that allow them to mitigate damage. And again they don't loose HPs when they take damage, they "spend" HP to avoid taking damage because HPs represent their skill in combat and in not taking damage.

QuoteI'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.

But you just said that gaining levels must mean they don't gain meat and it must be skill. Hits in D&D don't bleed,  they don't cause discomfort or a drop in ability (except the ability to avoid the next wound) so they can't be cuts can they? Surely its more logical to say the blow was turned from damage into something else by HP.

QuoteI 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.

But there is an explict relationship in D&D in a hit = HP loss. You loose HPs in a variety of explicit ways. You fall = HP loss, you get hit in combat = HP loss, you get caught in a fireball = HP loss. The relationship is explicit and it's -  "whenever the result of an incident would have caused a wound or other damage you loose HPs. If the loss of HPs exceeds your current HP total you are knocked unconscious".

QuoteThat 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".

I have used a similar system for the last 25 years or so because of these sorts of debates but also due to magical healing, trap damage and PCs of more than 4th level being toally unphased hen 2 guards point loaded heavy crossbows at them from 5 feet away.
However, I feel a complete system would include vitality cost for a wider range of actions and attacking in full armour would be one of those things. In each case though when taking an evasive action the PC needs to decide whether to spend vitality. You roll to hit a hit 5 damage. I can choose to take 5 wounds , maybe loosing an arm, or I can spend 5 vitality to turn the wound into a minor cut. If I want to use a power that costs say 6 vitality I might opt to take the 5 wounds and then expend my remaining 6 vitality on the charge to knock you over the cliff or lift the portcullis or whatever.

So even where I use such a system I never impose a HP loss on a miss. Doing so removes the possibility that you might actually just miss with your attack.

QuoteGranted, 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.

Hmmmm... I don't think you can equate a reformating of the entire combat/HP/Damage system with the the folical appearance of one of a number of possible PC racial types. I can see that some beleive that Vancian Casting is of a similar level of importance however I would argue that in the grand scheme of things if a wizard can cast 3 spells due to Slots or 3 spells due to Manna points the actual difference to the game is somewhat limited.

Quote from: Omega;768620Im 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?

Some people raise a criticism or voice an opinion.
Other people decry the criticism or opinion as having no possible validity. AT ALL.
Another will refuse to engage the topic dismissing through caricature the nature of the argument itself.

What else is new? :rolleyes:

Quote from: CRKrueger;768646What else is new? :rolleyes:

Damage on a miss is new. Then old... Then whatever...

It has at least shown just how divergent some view HP and/or hits and misses.

It's occurred to me that damage on a miss can be reverse engineered to a degree that the attacker doesn't roll to hit at all and the defender rolls a kind of 'reverse' AC saving throw...

So, when you're in combat, you take damage per round, whatever. Let's say that it is 3 points of damage. This damage increases to full weapon + bonuses damage if you fail an AC saving throw.

Your saving throw is equal to your AC minus the attack bonus of the person hitting you.

So, your AC is 18 and you opponent's attack is +6. On a saving throw of 1-11, you take 3 damage, if you roll 12 plus, the attacker rolls full weapon damage.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768469Bit 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.

I think you misundertood where I stand. I'm very much against DoaM, which is basically HP's lost even if you successfully defend. My statement about "defending yourself should cost hp's" was made to illustrate the point about the ridiculousness of it. DoaM basically says, "Good job defending yourself--have some damage." The argument always forwarded by others in support of DoaM is that the exertion of defense accounts for the damage (the second argument is, "well, wizards can do it! [sniff]."

My statement back there was basically speaking to the first point about exertion. If we're going to say defending one's self--successfully-- costs HP's, then let's just spend HP's every round just to fight. I'm not saying I want to do that. I'm saying that's what DoaM is basically all about. If we want to carry this even further then SWINGING mister big costs more exertion than stabbing with a dagger. Then we're getting into activation costs and all that other bullshit that, yep, does work best in the video game. Beyond all that a miss isn't a hit. It just isn't. Foul balls don't count.

(P.S. Not everyone think's HP's represent fatigue. I've heard "meat" and "plot armor" as two alternatives [and I think the second makes the most sense, if not running with wounds).

Quote from: Omega;768673Damage on a miss is new. Then old... Then whatever...

It has at least shown just how divergent some view HP and/or hits and misses.

I think when we can't agree that a miss is actually a miss, then we have problems even discussing the issue, because we can't frame it in the same way. DoaM assumes one ALWAYS hits, and sometimes hits harder. There is no "miss." In 13th age, pretty much everything "hits," so they avoid the argument (and make everyone feel good about themselves in the process, evidently).

(you're right about HP's--those discussions just go round and round and round [which is why the system could use a wounds module, IMHO]).

Quote from: Marleycat;768636Actual medieval armour never weighed more then 20-30 pounds if that. Much like actual heavy weaponry wasn't more then 3-5 pounds. Why else would anybody actually use it.

30 pounds is about right for a hauberk of average size. Of course that is ONLY the armor.

A typical dungeon explorer will have a backpack full of supplies and gear; torches, rope, spikes, etc. which can easily weigh another 30 pounds or more which makes a D&D fighter carrying around 60+ pounds not all that uncommon.

Weapon weights in D&D are generally too heavy. A typical normal sword is about 3 pounds, with a long or bastard sword perhaps 4-5 pounds.

D&D mace weights are utterly ridiculous. A standard flanged German mace is just under 3 pounds. Show me someone who isn't huge and green using a 10+ pound 1 handed weapon and I'll show you a dead man.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;76868430 pounds is about right for a hauberk of average size. Of course that is ONLY the armor.

A typical dungeon explorer will have a backpack full of supplies and gear; torches, rope, spikes, etc. which can easily weigh another 30 pounds or more which makes a D&D fighter carrying around 60+ pounds not all that uncommon.

Weapon weights in D&D are generally too heavy. A typical normal sword is about 3 pounds, with a long or bastard sword perhaps 4-5 pounds.

D&D mace weights are utterly ridiculous. A standard flanged German mace is just under 3 pounds. Show me someone who isn't huge and green using a 10+ pound 1 handed weapon and I'll show you a dead man.

60 pounds for adventuring gear isn't unreasonable in fact it may even be more. Modern soldiers pack more than that in full combat.

Quote from: Marleycat;768721Modern soldiers pack more than that in full combat.

I went hiking/camping with some squaddies, and the sheer amount of crap they were carrying was breathtaking. Their beer alone probably weighed more than my whole kit.

Quote from: jadrax;768730I went hiking/camping with some squaddies, and the sheer amount of crap they were carrying was breathtaking. Their beer alone probably weighed more than my whole kit.

Nice.

Quote from: Marleycat;768636Actual medieval armour never weighed more then 20-30 pounds if that. Much like actual heavy weaponry wasn't more then 3-5 pounds. Why else would anybody actually use it.

What I said was "for fighting while wearing and carrying 60 lbs. of armor and gear instead of 10 lbs. of gear."

You will notice I never said that the armor alone weighed 60 lbs. And Exploderwizard provided the examples of what "gear" might be involved.

Quote from: Marleycat;76872160 pounds for adventuring gear isn't unreasonable in fact it may even be more. Modern soldiers pack more than that in full combat.

80 to 100lb ruck sacks were the norm, depending on how long you were planning on being gone.

However, and this is one thing that is never done in D&D games but would be done in pretty much every single combat where melee would take place, is the rucks would be dropped.  If you wanted to be a realistic DM, you would assign a pretty hefty penalty to fighting while wearing a full ruck.

I guess it's one of those things you never really address in the game for the sake of the game, like most bathroom breaks and getting normal illnesses.