|
|
Post by DMC on Apr 3, 2015 16:23:29 GMT
So the 5E DMG Page #242 has this variant rule. Has anyone used it, or anything similar before? How'd it go?
Success at a Cost
Failure can be tough, but the agony is compounded
when a character fails by the barest margin. When a
character fails a roll by only 1 or 2, you can allow the
character to succeed at the cost of a complication or
hindrance. Such complications can run along any of the
following lines:
• A character manages to get her sword past a
hobgoblin's defenses and turn a near miss into a hit,
but the hobgoblin twists its shield and disarms her.
• A character narrowly escapes the full brunt of a
fireball but ends up prone.
• A character fails to intimidate a kobold prisoner, but
the kobold reveals its secrets anyway while shrieking
at the top of its lungs, alerting other nearby monsters.
• A character manages to finish an arduous climb to the
top of a cliff despite slipping, only to realize that the
rope on which his companions dangle below him is
close to breaking.
When you introduce costs such as these, try to make
them obstacles and setbacks that change the nature
of the adventuring situation. In exchange for success,
players must consider new ways of facing the challenge.
You can also use this technique when a character
succeeds on a roll by hitting the DC exactly,
complicating marginal success in interesting ways.
|
|
Samuel Wise
Demigod
Ready to Help...
Posts: 989
Favorite D&D Class: Warlock
Favorite D&D Race: Mousefolk
|
Post by Samuel Wise on Apr 3, 2015 17:03:51 GMT
On the first game I DMd one of my players attempted to stab a civilian (don't ask...). The civilian had his back turned, but the player still rolled a 1. How could the player miss when he stabs someone point blank with the civilians back turned? So instead the player nearly missed, stabbing the NPC through the hand. The sword went through the hand and embedded itself into the side of the bar counter. The Character had to pull his sword free before he could continue.
That is the only time I have used that. I like the idea, especially if you have to get information to the players, but the rolls don't seem to be leaning that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by dm_mainprize on Apr 3, 2015 17:55:20 GMT
I haven't, but it is an idea that interests me. As a new DM all ideas interest me and are worth trying. My question would be do you offer this as options? or just tell them that is how it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Apr 3, 2015 19:49:16 GMT
I haven't, but it is an idea that interests me. As a new DM all ideas interest me and are worth trying. My question would be do you offer this as options? or just tell them that is how it is. Personally, I like it and want to try it, but I also wouldn't want to overuse it either. I'd save it for the "WOW!" moments, not every single miss. Basically when it would really enhance the story and fun! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 17:56:03 GMT
I don't do it with attacks or saving throws, but I frequently fail forward on ability and skill checks.
|
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Apr 5, 2015 2:10:21 GMT
I like this as well, and agree that it should be an every roll rule. It would lose its luster and just be something the players expected. I think using it mainly, if not exclusively for skill check/saving throws is a great idea as well. Those rolls typically exist outside of combat and carry more weight than a single miss in combat.
Also, I could have sworn I commented on this yesterday, but I suppose not.
|
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Apr 6, 2015 15:29:27 GMT
I'd also tie this in similarly like I posted about in the "Advantage" thread. The more a player gets involved and describes their actions, the more likely I will throw them a bone and use this mechanic as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by robosnake on Aug 17, 2015 0:16:27 GMT
Success at a cost is a house-rule I add to almost every game I run in pretty much every system (where it isn't already part of it). One example I use is a character is picking a lock, and if they don't roll a success, they can still succeed, just as a guard turns the corner to see them. A lot of the time, a failure is OK, you just move on to Plan B or the next combat round, but I use this at the very least for situations where a failure will halt the story, or not add something fun. I normally leave it up to the player - you can succeed at a cost, but I pick the cost. It's almost always a fun option for all of us at the table, so players usually take me up on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vulash on Aug 17, 2015 15:25:41 GMT
I'm on board with all of the comments and thoughts behind turning near misses into an opportunity to better the tension and story...however....
I'm not sure I like those rules as stated. Every one of those options puts you in a worse position than simply missing. I'd hate to penalize my characters more for barely missing than outright missing. Maybe if it was the last hit on a big creature? Otherwise, one hit on a foe is barely game-changing, but having a character disarmed or go prone can turn the battle against the PCs.
If I were to add in the concept, personally I'd alter it quite a bit. I would be a fan of giving the PC a choice to leave their defenses open in order to hit. Perhaps they get an opening, but would leave themselves open in the process. They can take the hit, but the creature will get an immediate opportunity attack against them, or they take a penalty to AC for the next round.
|
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Aug 18, 2015 2:58:06 GMT
I can see where you are coming from, and agree that some of the examples from the DMG are pretty extreme. I think that the disadvantage dice system from Star Wars Edge of Empire is a more fitting style for allowing near misses to "hit, but" and even the Kobold telling the plan but alerting others falls under that. That said, I am pretty sure that an immediate attack of opportunity could be devastating for lower level play, which is also where I think Damage on a Miss would shine more.
On some level though I can see why they might put such a high price on DoaM. If a first level player has a 16 in their main damage stat they will likely have a +5 to hit given proficiency of 2. Using a Bugbear as an example monster, the AC to meet or beat is 16. So all things truly random, there is a 50/50 shot to hit that smelly jerk. If you give the player DoaM when they roll a 9 that's a pretty substantial dip into the miss range that they would have had, and to some would warrant a substantial trade off.
Again, I think some of the examples are extreme, and wouldn't be worth the DoaM. I think if it is coupled well with some flavor, especially if it is flavor from the PCs rather than the DM then it would be a very worth while addition. If it falls into a 1 or 2 point cushion every time traded for prone then it would get boring fairly quickly.
The other interesting idea is: if you let players do it, do you let NPCs do it as well?
|
|
|
|
Post by robosnake on Aug 18, 2015 5:19:26 GMT
I'm on board with all of the comments and thoughts behind turning near misses into an opportunity to better the tension and story...however.... I'm not sure I like those rules as stated. Every one of those options puts you in a worse position than simply missing. I'd hate to penalize my characters more for barely missing than outright missing. Maybe if it was the last hit on a big creature? Otherwise, one hit on a foe is barely game-changing, but having a character disarmed or go prone can turn the battle against the PCs. If I were to add in the concept, personally I'd alter it quite a bit. I would be a fan of giving the PC a choice to leave their defenses open in order to hit. Perhaps they get an opening, but would leave themselves open in the process. They can take the hit, but the creature will get an immediate opportunity attack against them, or they take a penalty to AC for the next round. Maybe grant a bonus to your attackers equal to the one you'd have needed to hit? So, you miss by 2, but you can still hit, and then attacks against you are +2 next round. Or even double that. I figure, design-wise, in missing an attack you lose an action (at most). So an alternative consequence can be something that loses you the equivalent of an action. Or, since 5E has this under-utilized exhaustion track, you hit, but you take a level of exhaustion? (I just say under-utilized because it is hard to find a character sheet that even has the track on it, even though it's a cool idea in my book). |
|
