Do Your Worst! - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Do Your Worst!

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
dalzig
Jan 09, 2009 20:30:41 A simple houserule that I feel might need to be explored is...

[indent]You can always choose to do worse than you roll. You can choose to lower defenses, passive skills, etc., at any time.[/indent]

Does anyone see anything that breaks with a rule such as this?

Possible Applications:
Swordmages have powers that play off of getting hit. If they don't get hit, they can't really use their powers.

Several rituals have skill checks. Being able to do worse makes them more versatile. Use Cure Disease to kill someone while looking like you were saving them. Make it so you can't be affected by your own Magic Circle. You may wish for some rituals to have a shorter duration.

Several attacks have an effect that has "(save ends)" if you hit, but the same effect "until the end of your next turn" if you miss.
#2
pigknight
Jan 09, 2009 20:47:41 I roll saves at the end of a turn. But the other exploitations might be problematic.
#3
alex319
Jan 10, 2009 0:52:23 Alice gets the BBEG in a Garrote Grip (Rogue Daily 15). Alice's ally Bob targets Alice with an attack and intentionally misses. Automatic hit on the BBEG.

(Admittedly, though, this is more a problem with Garrote Grip itself than your proposed rule. Even without the proposed rule, this could still be abused by setting yourself up with large penalties to hit, say from cover or concealment.)
#4
aluman
Jan 10, 2009 15:40:25 The inherent problem with this is wizards and AoE, right now some of the extra damage can be justifed as its 'friendly' fire AOE, meaning allies can be accidentally (or purposefully) in the AoE and take damage. Being able to miss allies, essentially invalidates this. Whether this is game breaking...I don't
know.
#5
dalzig
Jan 10, 2009 16:24:29 Ah, I knew I missed something. That would indeed be a big problem, Aluman.

New rule:
[indent]When making a skill check or ability check, the result of the check represents the maximum possible result. You may choose any specific result that is lower than you succeeded at.

When making an attack, you may choose to intentionally miss. If the attack includes multiple targets, you must miss all of them to use this option.

At any time, as a free action, you may voluntarily lower your defenses or passive senses by a number of your choosing. This reduction lasts until the start of your next turn.[/indent]

Still doesn't solve the Garrote Grip problem, but that's a corner case that I'd be willing to smack my players for abusing.

Something else I'm considering is self-applying some conditions. Shutting your eyes to make you blinded, lying very still to be helpless, or holding back on your attacks to be weakened. This would probably be more abusable, but I can't think of any specific cases off the top of my head.
#6
vebrandsson
Jan 10, 2009 20:07:20
The inherent problem with this is wizards and AoE, right now some of the extra damage can be justifed as its 'friendly' fire AOE, meaning allies can be accidentally (or purposefully) in the AoE and take damage. Being able to miss allies, essentially invalidates this. Whether this is game breaking...I don't
know.

They made the Spell Accuracy feat an epic tier feat for a reason, and its only real use is to miss allies with your AoE powers.

If I'm not mistaken most rituals allow you to choose a lower result, and specifically say you can do so in their text. I think that eliminates almost any need to lower a skill check short of madness. As for missing, I don't think many miss effects are worth intentionally missing to get, sure your status ailment may last a turn or two longer but thats situational, the closer the creature is to you in iniative the less that makes sense. Lowering your defenses if you're against reasonable challenges should not be neccessary, if you have to lower your defenses to be hit then your DM needs to take up the encounter level a notch.
#7
Malph
Jan 11, 2009 23:24:10
Still doesn't solve the Garrote Grip problem, but that's a corner case that I'd be willing to smack my players for abusing.

And herein lies the answer to any "loop-hole" in rules, either as-written or house-made.

-M
#8
anticore
Jan 16, 2009 1:16:14 Hey there!

I look at a "choose to miss" situation not as a forced failure but as a successful attack at nothing. If that makes sense.

Look at a movie stunt man for example. They are throwing punches at each other and intentionally missing, but on occasion they hit. It happens because they failed a successful attack at the air near the victim, and by failing they accidentally hit the victim...

So I would have a character roll an attack with out any negatives to swing or shoot the area NEAR the target they wish to miss. If they fail they could potentially hit the target. This doesnt mean every failure is a hit but you can figure out something like a chart or something else clever to use. (I still like pulling out the old advanced DnD homebrew crit tables once in a while.. lol)

Also, the closer they wish to come to the target (i.e a knife thrower hitting throwing a knife a half inch from the face of the target) would then be something like a called shot, or an attack with some penalty attached.

But then again I am all about simple, fast rules in combat to not break the flow.

I hope this helps a little bit.

-Anticore
#9
syrsuro
Jan 17, 2009 4:51:26 I think I would be tempted to say that there are 'voluntary' modifiers and 'involuntary' modifiers.

Rather than saying that you can miss with your attack, I'd say that you can choose not to apply your level and ability bonus. But if you roll a 20 or if your roll plus weapon bonus is sufficient to hit, you still hit. (And for any attack targeting multiple creatures, you must use or not use the bonuses on all attacks).

Carl
#10
Valien
Jan 17, 2009 12:37:32
When making an attack, you may choose to intentionally miss. If the attack includes multiple targets, you must miss all of them to use this option.

Swordmage level 1 daily attack spell: Whirling Blade

"I attack a target within 5 squares but choose to intentionally miss him, so I will attack a target within 5 squares of the primary".

Or:

Creature dominates the fighter. The fighter attacks the fragile wizard. "I choose to miss!"

I believe this rule opens space for many situations that were not supposed to happen.
#11
Shedeo
Jan 17, 2009 16:42:35 You could just say this!

"When activating a power, you can choose to take a penalty to your attack rolls, equal to whatever you want! However, you take this penalty on all of the attack rolls with the power."

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 dalzig Jan 09, 2009 20:30:41	A simple houserule that I feel might need to be explored is... [indent]You can always choose to do worse than you roll. You can choose to lower defenses, passive skills, etc., at any time.[/indent] Does anyone see anything that breaks with a rule such as this? Possible Applications: Swordmages have powers that play off of getting hit. If they don't get hit, they can't really use their powers. Several rituals have skill checks. Being able to do worse makes them more versatile. Use Cure Disease to kill someone while looking like you were saving them. Make it so you can't be affected by your own Magic Circle. You may wish for some rituals to have a shorter duration. Several attacks have an effect that has "(save ends)" if you hit, but the same effect "until the end of your next turn" if you miss.
#2 pigknight Jan 09, 2009 20:47:41	I roll saves at the end of a turn. But the other exploitations might be problematic.
#3 alex319 Jan 10, 2009 0:52:23	Alice gets the BBEG in a Garrote Grip (Rogue Daily 15). Alice's ally Bob targets Alice with an attack and intentionally misses. Automatic hit on the BBEG. (Admittedly, though, this is more a problem with Garrote Grip itself than your proposed rule. Even without the proposed rule, this could still be abused by setting yourself up with large penalties to hit, say from cover or concealment.)
#4 aluman Jan 10, 2009 15:40:25	The inherent problem with this is wizards and AoE, right now some of the extra damage can be justifed as its 'friendly' fire AOE, meaning allies can be accidentally (or purposefully) in the AoE and take damage. Being able to miss allies, essentially invalidates this. Whether this is game breaking...I don't know.
#5 dalzig Jan 10, 2009 16:24:29	Ah, I knew I missed something. That would indeed be a big problem, Aluman. New rule: [indent]When making a skill check or ability check, the result of the check represents the maximum possible result. You may choose any specific result that is lower than you succeeded at. When making an attack, you may choose to intentionally miss. If the attack includes multiple targets, you must miss all of them to use this option. At any time, as a free action, you may voluntarily lower your defenses or passive senses by a number of your choosing. This reduction lasts until the start of your next turn.[/indent] Still doesn't solve the Garrote Grip problem, but that's a corner case that I'd be willing to smack my players for abusing. Something else I'm considering is self-applying some conditions. Shutting your eyes to make you blinded, lying very still to be helpless, or holding back on your attacks to be weakened. This would probably be more abusable, but I can't think of any specific cases off the top of my head.
#6 vebrandsson Jan 10, 2009 20:07:20	The inherent problem with this is wizards and AoE, right now some of the extra damage can be justifed as its 'friendly' fire AOE, meaning allies can be accidentally (or purposefully) in the AoE and take damage. Being able to miss allies, essentially invalidates this. Whether this is game breaking...I don't know. They made the Spell Accuracy feat an epic tier feat for a reason, and its only real use is to miss allies with your AoE powers. If I'm not mistaken most rituals allow you to choose a lower result, and specifically say you can do so in their text. I think that eliminates almost any need to lower a skill check short of madness. As for missing, I don't think many miss effects are worth intentionally missing to get, sure your status ailment may last a turn or two longer but thats situational, the closer the creature is to you in iniative the less that makes sense. Lowering your defenses if you're against reasonable challenges should not be neccessary, if you have to lower your defenses to be hit then your DM needs to take up the encounter level a notch.
#7 Malph Jan 11, 2009 23:24:10	Still doesn't solve the Garrote Grip problem, but that's a corner case that I'd be willing to smack my players for abusing. And herein lies the answer to any "loop-hole" in rules, either as-written or house-made. -M
#8 anticore Jan 16, 2009 1:16:14	Hey there! I look at a "choose to miss" situation not as a forced failure but as a successful attack at nothing. If that makes sense. Look at a movie stunt man for example. They are throwing punches at each other and intentionally missing, but on occasion they hit. It happens because they failed a successful attack at the air near the victim, and by failing they accidentally hit the victim... So I would have a character roll an attack with out any negatives to swing or shoot the area NEAR the target they wish to miss. If they fail they could potentially hit the target. This doesnt mean every failure is a hit but you can figure out something like a chart or something else clever to use. (I still like pulling out the old advanced DnD homebrew crit tables once in a while.. lol) Also, the closer they wish to come to the target (i.e a knife thrower hitting throwing a knife a half inch from the face of the target) would then be something like a called shot, or an attack with some penalty attached. But then again I am all about simple, fast rules in combat to not break the flow. I hope this helps a little bit. -Anticore
#9 syrsuro Jan 17, 2009 4:51:26	I think I would be tempted to say that there are 'voluntary' modifiers and 'involuntary' modifiers. Rather than saying that you can miss with your attack, I'd say that you can choose not to apply your level and ability bonus. But if you roll a 20 or if your roll plus weapon bonus is sufficient to hit, you still hit. (And for any attack targeting multiple creatures, you must use or not use the bonuses on all attacks). Carl
#10 Valien Jan 17, 2009 12:37:32	When making an attack, you may choose to intentionally miss. If the attack includes multiple targets, you must miss all of them to use this option. Swordmage level 1 daily attack spell: Whirling Blade "I attack a target within 5 squares but choose to intentionally miss him, so I will attack a target within 5 squares of the primary". Or: Creature dominates the fighter. The fighter attacks the fragile wizard. "I choose to miss!" I believe this rule opens space for many situations that were not supposed to happen.
#11 Shedeo Jan 17, 2009 16:42:35	You could just say this! "When activating a power, you can choose to take a penalty to your attack rolls, equal to whatever you want! However, you take this penalty on all of the attack rolls with the power."