Today I'm discussing melee/combat, and specifically the Attack Roll. What constitutes a hit or miss? -or- What does the Attack Roll really mean?
Oftentimes my players know what they need to roll to deal damage to a monster, or they can figure it out. Unlike some DMs, I don't roll behind the DM screen. All of my rolls are in the open and I allow my players to roll for themselves. If they roll a 16 and I say "miss" and then they roll a 17 and get to roll for damage, then obviously they know they need to roll at least a 17 to hit. Some of them have argued in the past that a "near miss" like that 16 should maybe do one hit point of damage, or at least distract the enemy into disadvantage for their next attack, especially if the 17 dealt double digit damage (try saying that five times fast).
Let's go back to that sentence they need to roll at least a 17 to hit. That's not exactly accurate. A 17 doesn't mean they hit. It means they deal damage. There's a difference. In my games, the Attack Roll doesn't have to mean a single swing of the sword or chop of the axe. Remember, a Turn in D&D lasts approximately 6 seconds, and a lot of swinging can happen in that amount of time. Sometimes an attack is a complex routine of twirling and lunging and parrying.
Ho! Ha-ha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust! Twang!
In those cases, a low attack roll doesn't mean that the PC just took a swing and missed, but instead, the entire series of attack moves failed to cause any injury. They might have missed entirely if the opponent dodged around, bobbing and weaving, or maybe the attacker pummeled the defender mercilessly but the guy's shield protected him, deflecting everything away. It all depends on how you describe it.
Situation 1
Jim the Barbarian: "I attack the Orc."
DM: "How?"
Jim the Barbarian: "With my sword."
*rolls a 16*
DM: "You charge in with a powerful overhead chop, but the Orc gets his mace up in time to knock your arm away."
You hit but didn't do any damage.
Situation 2
Jim the Barbarian: "I attack the Orc."
DM: "How?"
Jim the Barbarian: "With my sword."
*rolls a 17*
DM: "Roll for damage."
*rolls a 1*
DM: "You charge in with a powerful overhead chop. The Orc gets his mace up in time to block, but the blow was obviously jarring to his shoulder."
You don't actually hit the Orc, but you do hit its weapon and still cause a little damage.
Situation 3
Jim the Barbarian: "I attack the Orc."
DM: "How?"
Jim the Barbarian: "With my sword."
*rolls a 17*
DM: "Roll for damage."
*rolls an 8*
DM: "You charge in with a powerful overhead chop. The Orc doesn't get his mace up in time to block, and the blow cuts through his rusty chainmail, drawing blood."
You hit the Orc and make it bleed from a physical wound. This is what we all think of as a successful Attack Roll.
A successful Attack Roll means you injured your opponent somehow, reducing its Hit Points, which brings up another topic. What exactly are Hit Points? Hit Points are not a measure of your life essence, or resistance to dying. Hit Points represent your endurance; your resistance to fatigue and eventual unconsciousness. This is why you don't die when your Hit Points reach zero, but you are rendered unconscious.
4e allowed for a Healing Surge using this concept of fatigue. (I love Healing Surges, both as a Player -AND- as DM.) Imagine any action movie you've ever seen. In the middle of a chase scene with a gunfight, someone will crouch down behind a dumpster in an alley to 'catch his breath'. That's a Healing Surge. You are ducking out of a fight, or taking a purely defensive posture to catch your breath. In Star Wars, the adversaries talk to each while moving in a circle, sizing each other up, during pauses when they aren't banging their glow sticks together. They are taking a Healing Surge to get back a few Hit Points.
Anyways, a hit with an Attack Roll doesn't necessarily mean you physically hit the monster. Just like you can hit a monster without reducing its Hit Points (like that 16 you rolled earlier). Maybe that 17 that only dealt 1 point of damage was because the Orc's shield blocked every swing of your sword. You never drew blood, but you still fatigued it slightly. Maybe raising its shield to repeatedly block your sword is tiring it out, or maybe your raging attack has simply scared it a little.
Situation 4
Jim the Barbarian: "I attack the Orc."
DM: "How?"
Jim the Barbarian: "With my sword."
*rolls a 17*
DM: "Roll for damage."
*rolls a 1*
DM: "You charge in swinging your blade back and forth. The Orc brings his mace up in time to parry the thrusts, but you can see his reactions are slowing."
Even though you don't actually hit the Orc (just his weapon), you are wearing him down.
Situation 5
Jim the Barbarian: "I attack the Orc."
DM: "How?"
Jim the Barbarian: "I scream out my battle cry and furiously charge at him while circling my sword around over my head."
*rolls a 17*
DM: "Roll for damage."
*rolls a 1*
DM: "You charge in with a powerful overhead chop. The Orc gets his mace up in time to block, but you can see he's lost the fire from his eyes."
Your weapon is blocked by the Orc's, but you still deal a little damage, not from physical injury, but from a blow to its confidence.
These examples show different ways of describing the action. Even though all the situations are very similar, each is a very different battle.
Hopefully these concepts give you some ideas for describing your own battle situations. Credit needs to be given to Philotomy's Musings. Philotomy.com seems to be defunct, but you can still do a Google search to find some of the .pdf's and mirrors.
If you have any comments, I'd love to hear them. Post ideas and share!
Thanks, and Good Journeys!
No comments:
Post a Comment