Having a character do 0 damage when they roll makes sense - they did not manage to put enough strength to penetrate the clothes and skin and that's fine.
But since unarmed combat never rolls for damage, it means half of the planet (all those 3-9 STR) won't ever damage anybody with an unarmed strike and that just doesn't make sense.
Rolling for unarmed strike damage is a core feature of the Monk class.
Also a character with only 3 Strength cannot do more than 0 damage on a normal hit with a Club because of their Strength modifier. Even on a critical hit with a Club such a character will still do 0 damage 37.5% of the time (assuming you roll 2d4 and not 1d4 and double the result).
Having a character do 0 damage when they roll makes sense - they did not manage to put enough strength to penetrate the clothes and skin and that's fine.
But since unarmed combat never rolls for damage, it means half of the planet (all those 3-9 STR) won't ever damage anybody with an unarmed strike and that just doesn't make sense.
Don't forget that HP is an abstraction. You could probably take punches from a weakling all day long and the most damage would be to your patience. A commoner has a strength of 10, so they are going to be doing damage when they hit you. But your noodly armed wizards whose most physical activity is lifting that large book over there is not going to do much at all.
That gets into "what's the difference between an attack that hits but inflicts no damage and an attack that misses?" Even a two-year-old can do some damage if they hit someone in the right place (especially since at that age they probably haven't learned to limit how hard they hit so as to avoid hurting themselves yet), the issue is actually hitting that right place, and someone with a low strength score is not going to hit very often due to the penalty on melee attacks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
They may have some of those features despite having low Strenght score, which may be the case for many classes that rely on different ability scores to make attack rolls such as spellcasters or ranged/finesse weapon users.
I mean, you could technically heal them - if someone’s unconscious, you could slap them awake. You could word it in a way that it gives them focus, thus allowing them to acknowledge their situation, thereby being more aware of attacks and taking less damage.
Although in the long run that’s completely broken, the damage on an unarmed strike is always the same so the wizard (or weakest character) in your party could just slap everyone alive.
I have a character whose strength modifier is negative 1, so 1-1=0. What if their modifier was negative 3? Certainly they can't heal with their unarmed strikes as 1-3= -2 .. the -2 wouldn't be "added" to the target's HP.
As the DM, you can change the rules as you see fit. In my opinion, if you get a negative value on your unarmed strike, you can choose to actually have it heal the person being attacked. It would be a hilarious mechanic, and this is a special case, as it is very rare, I think, for a character to have a (-1) STR modifier.
If I were the DM, I'd totally have the negative value heal the enemy. It's hilarious, and as the DM I would have that power.
As a DM you have to be imaginative and flexible enough to adjust for situations. I mean a finesse weapon used by a Neg Str bonus character will do damage...why? What makes the "finesse" attack do damage? The idea is that the weapon is used in a more precise way so as to hit soft spots vs striking with brute str (and this is just a ruff idea). So couldn't a strike to the balls with a fist be considered a "finesse" strike and therefore do at least 1hp of damage? Up to the DM. I would say that in a case of Neg Str character striking unarmed, if the player describes something that would seem like it would do ANY kind of damage, I would consider it for at LEAST 1hp of damage and adjust the ToHit rolls accordingly...i.e., the player goes for the eyes...Even a baby can damage your eyes!...and maybe make it a Dex roll of some sort since it's not a raw STR thing, but a Precision thing.
With all that said, Would unarmed attacks be considered finesse weapons? Just did some reading aaaand no. But as it says at the beginning of all the rulebooks...it's all just guidelines...Not really "Rules" in the strictest sense.
"And as a referee, the DM interprets the rules and decides when to abide by them and when to change them."-Intro, Dungeon Master's Guide.
Having a character do 0 damage when they roll makes sense - they did not manage to put enough strength to penetrate the clothes and skin and that's fine.
But since unarmed combat never rolls for damage, it means half of the planet (all those 3-9 STR) won't ever damage anybody with an unarmed strike and that just doesn't make sense.
Rolling for unarmed strike damage is a core feature of the Monk class.
Also a character with only 3 Strength cannot do more than 0 damage on a normal hit with a Club because of their Strength modifier. Even on a critical hit with a Club such a character will still do 0 damage 37.5% of the time (assuming you roll 2d4 and not 1d4 and double the result).
Great point!!
That gets into "what's the difference between an attack that hits but inflicts no damage and an attack that misses?" Even a two-year-old can do some damage if they hit someone in the right place (especially since at that age they probably haven't learned to limit how hard they hit so as to avoid hurting themselves yet), the issue is actually hitting that right place, and someone with a low strength score is not going to hit very often due to the penalty on melee attacks.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Technically true, but are characters who have strength scores that low really going to have a lot of abilities that require a successful melee attack?
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
They may have some of those features despite having low Strenght score, which may be the case for many classes that rely on different ability scores to make attack rolls such as spellcasters or ranged/finesse weapon users.
I mean, you could technically heal them - if someone’s unconscious, you could slap them awake. You could word it in a way that it gives them focus, thus allowing them to acknowledge their situation, thereby being more aware of attacks and taking less damage.
Although in the long run that’s completely broken, the damage on an unarmed strike is always the same so the wizard (or weakest character) in your party could just slap everyone alive.
…and then I swing him into a hedge.
As the DM, you can change the rules as you see fit. In my opinion, if you get a negative value on your unarmed strike, you can choose to actually have it heal the person being attacked. It would be a hilarious mechanic, and this is a special case, as it is very rare, I think, for a character to have a (-1) STR modifier.
If I were the DM, I'd totally have the negative value heal the enemy. It's hilarious, and as the DM I would have that power.
As a DM you have to be imaginative and flexible enough to adjust for situations. I mean a finesse weapon used by a Neg Str bonus character will do damage...why? What makes the "finesse" attack do damage? The idea is that the weapon is used in a more precise way so as to hit soft spots vs striking with brute str (and this is just a ruff idea). So couldn't a strike to the balls with a fist be considered a "finesse" strike and therefore do at least 1hp of damage? Up to the DM. I would say that in a case of Neg Str character striking unarmed, if the player describes something that would seem like it would do ANY kind of damage, I would consider it for at LEAST 1hp of damage and adjust the ToHit rolls accordingly...i.e., the player goes for the eyes...Even a baby can damage your eyes!...and maybe make it a Dex roll of some sort since it's not a raw STR thing, but a Precision thing.
With all that said, Would unarmed attacks be considered finesse weapons? Just did some reading aaaand no. But as it says at the beginning of all the rulebooks...it's all just guidelines...Not really "Rules" in the strictest sense.
"And as a referee, the DM interprets the rules and decides when to abide by them and when to change them."-Intro, Dungeon Master's Guide.