Talk:Half-Damage on Hit Roll equal to AC (3.5e Variant Rule)

Slay Living?
So does that mean Slay Living will effectively have a +1 bonus to hit (since you really aren't trying to hit for the damage)? If so, I call shenanigans. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 22:25, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm, the way my group usually does it is that equaling AC is the same as a hit. If a monster has an AC of 22, and a fighter has a BAB of +4, if it gets an 18, it hits.  Spells work similarly;  Are your campaigns different?  If so, then anything that doesn't cause damage shouldn't apply with this variant;


 * I misread the rule. Redact previous statement :P. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 22:49, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Reason for the Rule
What's the reason for having this rule? Just seems to be more work/slow the game down... --Ghostwheel 21:46, October 16, 2009 (UTC)


 * Either for fluff or realism, and to save fighters/monks. If your creatures have high ACs, this makes them tougher to kill.  If your players have high AC, it makes them tougher to kill.  Ultimately, it helps melee builds, and they could usually take small boosts like this.


 * I guess I just don't see it :-\ *shrug* --Ghostwheel 05:21, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Natural 20?
What happens when the attacker rolls a natural 20 and just meets the targets AC? Would you suggest 1/2 damage as usual with this rule, or full damage to reflect the lucky nature of a natural 20? What about an attack that hit only because of a natural 20, that would have missed if a natural 20 was not an automatic hit?

I'm thinking full damage if the AC is met, but only 1/2 damage if the AC is not met. Any thoughts? --Be well 09:30, October 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Natural 20s are meant to show that you automatically succeed at the attack through sheer force of luck. As such, I would say full damage, but the main rule on variants is that it is up to the DM.  Still, if one wants to choose between those subvariants, one has to look at why they set it.  Do you want the variant to give another edge for PCs or for Monsters?  On average, PCs going for natural 20s to hit would be hitting something that is difficult to hit.  The very chance that she hit it means that she got lucky.  If the luck is only because the fighter has not developed their character to fight properly at that level, halving damage might annoy them even more, as you increase difficulty for fighters.  In this case, siding with the player on doing full damage might be a good idea, along with magical items tailored specifically for the fighter (so no random roll for magical item).  If your fighters generally don't need a 20 to hit the bigger creatures often, having natural 20s only deal half damage should hopefully be a sign that she attacked the wrong creature, and should probably flee if possible. --Havvy 11:03, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Precision Damage
I was thinking of introducing this variant rule in my future campaigns (if I get to be DM. In our games, it is mostly defenders win: attack roll=AC results in a miss), although I was hesitating on one point: would precision damage still be applied and halved? Or is a Near Miss just not a precision attack? -HarrowedMind 05:39, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Near Miss Range
I was also thinking of weapons with different Near Miss Ranges, but it could get complicated...
 * I guess the best and most simple way to integrate such a concept would be to add a property (natural, akin to Reach) to some weapons (Grazing?) with which an attack roll equivalent to the target's Armor Class plus or minus one deals half damage. This would be added to weapons who typically more often graze the target and still cause harm, though reduced, with a dodged blow. A flail, perhaps? (especially bladed...)
 * Might as well share my ideas. What do you think? -HarrowedMind 05:39, 12 October 2011 (UTC)