I’m not sure I agree about splitting hit and damage feeling weird,
It feels weird to me when you roll a really big number to hit their AC, and then roll the minimum for damage. Or the other way, where you just barely roll their AC and then roll max damage. There are narrative ways you could justify it, but I don’t see why you would want to. It’s not adding anything worth having to the experience, imo. The game doesn’t care if you beat the check by 0 or 20. It’s just an extra step and the information is discarded.
I think pf2e fixes this.
Forgot in my original: DND 5e barely has a concept of degree of success
I completely agree with that sentiment. I think the d20 itself is flawed in that it provides linear probability. I’m more a fan of 3d6 for the bell curve it provides.
When it comes to the damage, I can agree that a degree of success should play into it. I do like how white wolf systems carried the success level over into the damage roll.
It feels weird to me when you roll a really big number to hit their AC, and then roll the minimum for damage. Or the other way, where you just barely roll their AC and then roll max damage. There are narrative ways you could justify it, but I don’t see why you would want to. It’s not adding anything worth having to the experience, imo. The game doesn’t care if you beat the check by 0 or 20. It’s just an extra step and the information is discarded.
I think pf2e fixes this.
Forgot in my original: DND 5e barely has a concept of degree of success
I completely agree with that sentiment. I think the d20 itself is flawed in that it provides linear probability. I’m more a fan of 3d6 for the bell curve it provides.
When it comes to the damage, I can agree that a degree of success should play into it. I do like how white wolf systems carried the success level over into the damage roll.