|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 7:56AM
#11
|
|
|
DaBeerds has written some good stuff there.
I'd also add that it is important not to consider all "hits" against someone's HP as damage from the weapon. For instance, when I describe successful attacks they often take the form of the sort of things you'd see in a cinematic battle. So when the Grave Knight struck out with his great sword and hit for massive (but non-fatal) damage, it was described as the undead warrior overpowering the barbarian sword to sword before shoulder-checking him and throwing him off balance with a quick but supernaturally strong punch.
Throwing people off balance...landing non-weapon strikes and peeling open defenses can all describe HP-loss. Heck, you can even describe the PC as blocking the blows with their own weapon but that they feel their muscles tire and strain with the effort, making it difficult for them to continue to keep it up for much longer (dwindling HP).
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
My blog and stuff http://dmingtowin.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 8:25AM
#12
|
|
|
As Mr.Durriken said, do not think of hitting and missing to mean in D&D what they do in english.
In D&D, a hit means: not only did you strike him, you pushed through his defenses (like armor) enough to harm him.
In D&D, a miss does not mean you did not make contact. It could, but it could also mean his armor or sword or shield deflected your 'hit', such that it did no damage.
Additionally, losing hit points does not necessarily mean an actual wound. They are an abstraction, meant to reflect your ability to continue to battle.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 8:31AM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
The literalness of the terms is the cause of the dissonance, not the rules. If "Strength," "attack," "hit," "damage," and other terms are seen more as rules shorthand, than as being tied directly to their dictionary definitions, it's easier to imagine something that makes sense. That is, unless its to your disadvantage in a game to argue in favor of a particular point.
The same goes for the rest of the ability scores, and most other game terms.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 8:43AM
#14
|
|
|
The literalness of the terms is the cause of the dissonance, not the rules. If "Strength," "attack," "hit," "damage," and other terms are seen more as rules shorthand, than as being tied directly to their dictionary definitions, it's easier to imagine something that makes sense. That is, unless its to your disadvantage in a game to argue in favor of a particular point.
The same goes for the rest of the ability scores, and most other game terms.
This +1.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
My blog and stuff http://dmingtowin.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 10:10AM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2009
|
The literalness of the terms is the cause of the dissonance, not the rules. If "Strength," "attack," "hit," "damage," and other terms are seen more as rules shorthand, than as being tied directly to their dictionary definitions, it's easier to imagine something that makes sense. That is, unless its to your disadvantage in a game to argue in favor of a particular point.
The same goes for the rest of the ability scores, and most other game terms.
A rare moment when I agree with Centauri.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!)
*Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb.
http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 11:53AM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Jan 16, 2013
|
I agree that this is in the rules for game balance and to change it the way the OP is proposing will nerf some of his players. He has stated that he has plans to install some other changes to un-nerf them, however I think this is a mistake.
He mentions that his players are not that experienced. So to change from a fairly simple rule of "add STR mod to attack and damage rolls" to something much more complex, and then add even more complexity to try to "re-balance" things is just going to make it much more difficult on his players. It will also slow down combat a lot as each player will have to "add this" for attack, then "add this other number" for damage then of course there's the "oh wait, am I using this feat I forgot about that" so instead he/she has to "add this other number" then "this one", then etc, etc, etc.
Basically it will cause too many problems.
To the OP. Stick with the RAW for this as it has worked for a long time and is probably the easiest thing you can do for newer players.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 12:21PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Dec 31, 2007
|
As many other posters have pointed out, the rationale behind the strength to hit is, that it helps to penetrate your opponents armor / defenses. There are RPGs that already do what you are looking for (key to hit to dexterity) I can recommend GURPS. You can download GURPS LITE for free – just do a quick Google search. As an added bonus it has an elegant solution for issues like alignment.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 12:32PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
There's no good reason for Strength-based melee basic attacks. Many classes have melee attacks that key off of other ability scores, including Charisma. There are even powers now that key off the character's "highest ability score." This is probably what the game should have done from the beginning, or should have changed the rule to, rather than trying to patch things with feats. As forward-thinking as 4th Edition is, it is still fettered by a lot of simulationism and tradition.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 1:08PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Aug 15, 2011
|
Because Strength would become nearly useless otherwise.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 1:15PM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
Because Strength would become nearly useless otherwise.
Charisma was once nearly useless, so a bunch of skills were ginned up for it, and entire aspects of the game played up. The same would happen to Strength. Or maybe we'd finally move away from the attribute model.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
