No minimum damage?

[thereaper]

In most other editions, you got around the problem of attacks (like unarmed strikes with less than 10 strength) doing 0 or even negative damage (healing punches!) with the fact that there was a minimum damage. But I can't find such a rule in the PHB or DMG. Is it really not there, or am I just missing it?

[Ruslan]

You are right, there is no such rule. Now, I don't think there's a DM who's actually going to allow healing punches (and if you find one, please let me know, I have a bridge to sell to him), but by RAW, if a STR 7 character attacks with a strength-based weapon and rolls '1' on a damage die, he will deal negative 1 damage (1-2).

[Giant2005]

It isn't there because there isn't any real need for it. Damage Reduction is extremely rare and I think the only way to get it is via the Heavy Armor Master feat.

[ronlugge]

It isn't there because there isn't any real need for it. Damage Reduction is extremely rare and I think the only way to get it is via the Heavy Armor Master feat.

My wizard beats at you with his D6 quarterstaff, rolling a 1. -1 strength = 0 damage. Oh, wait, he's been hit by something that reduces strength by 4... -2 damage.

It's not all that rare.

[Giant2005]

My wizard beats at you with his D6 quarterstaff, rolling a 1. -1 strength = 0 damage. Oh, wait, he's been hit by something that reduces strength by 4... -2 damage.

It's not all that rare.

Fair call. Although I think it'd still be pretty rare unless the players were intentionally gimping their characters.

[ThermalSlapShot]

My wizard beats at you with his D6 quarterstaff, rolling a 1. -1 strength = 0 damage. Oh, wait, he's been hit by something that reduces strength by 4... -2 damage.

It's not all that rare.

Actually i believe that is in fact quite rare... The earliest ability is like Ray of Enfeeblement which halves the damage on str based attacks.

1d4 (1) - 1 = 0
0/2 = 0

Even Bestow Curse doesn't drop an ability score.

[thereaper]

Or the str 8 Rogue is disarmed and has nothing to attack with except his fists. Then, despite being only slightly weaker than the population at large, his punches are suddenly harmless.

[ThermalSlapShot]

Or the str 8 Rogue is disarmed and has nothing to attack with except his fists. Then, despite being only slightly weaker than the population at large, his punches are suddenly harmless.

Doesn't work that well on a rogue.

Use an item action or cunning action allows the rogue to pick up their weapon.

If the weapon is disarmed and then kicked away?

Bonus Action disengage, Move, Use Item Action (pickup), action attack.

Plus I believe disarm can be a Dex save (BM) or acrobatics check (DMG). Rogue has that covered. Even with an 8 Str if the rogue takes expertise in athletics and has to do an athletics contest to not drop the weapon they still at least have a bonus.

It takes a lot to disarm the rogue and it really isn't nothing more than a niche scenario.

The rogue is too slippery to stay in one spot and fist fight.

[thereaper]

Very well, then, if we want to be pedantic, the str 8 dexterity fighter instead. And let's say he's been grappled by a rogue with a +10 to athletics and has that feature that prevents him from rolling below a 10 (in other words, it's impossible to get out of the grapple).

[Giant2005]

Or the str 8 Rogue is disarmed and has nothing to attack with except his fists. Then, despite being only slightly weaker than the population at large, his punches are suddenly harmless.

Having experienced being in a fight against someone who's punches were harmless, I don't really see an issue with this. To me, more of a concern would be the guy with 12 Str doing double the damage of the guy with 10 Str but even that can be fluffed away as someone that has no idea how to throw a decent punch being compared to someone who does (Not just a difference in Strength even if that is all the mechanics imply).

[ThermalSlapShot]

Very well, then, if we want to be pedantic, the str 8 dexterity fighter instead. And let's say he's been grappled by a rogue with a +10 to athletics and has that feature that prevents him from rolling below a 10 (in other words, it's impossible to get out of the grapple).

The problem here is you are making very very very specific guidelines for a general rule.

Grapple doesn't stop attacks. Fighter pulls out a dagger/short sword/whatever, attack action (+extr attack), action surge (attack + extra attack).

If the rogue is grappling the Fighter then the rogue gets rid of its main advantage on the Fighter. The rogue is a mobile fighting type whereas the Fighter is a stand still and bash your face in.

[Safety Sword]

Can we allow common sense to switch on now?

[Demonic Spoon]

My guess is that this wasn't an oversight - rather, WotC figured that the space in the PHB required to print this rule, and the effort required on players and DMs to spend time looking it up in play was not worth the benefit. A DM is going to rule that it deals 1 damage or 0 damage, and it hardly matters which he chooses.

[ThermalSlapShot]

My guess is that this wasn't an oversight - rather, WotC figured that the space in the PHB required to print this rule, and the effort required on players and DMs to spend time looking it up in play was not worth the benefit. A DM is going to rule that it deals 1 damage or 0 damage, and it hardly matters which he chooses.

The only thing that would matter what the DM chooses is if the player had abilities that work off "when you damage a creature...".

Not sure if those exist or not off the top of my head but that right there could turn the tide n a battle.

I think 0 is a fine minimum for damage since a lot of what I remember works off from " hit with weapon attack" type wording.

[rhouck]

Interesting, I had just assumed that there was a 1 min damage rule. There's even a Crawford tweet confirming that 0 damage is a possibility. That's makes heavy armor master even better at low levels!

[ThermalSlapShot]

Interesting, I had just assumed that there was a 1 min damage rule. There's even a Crawford tweet confirming that 0 damage is a possibility. That's makes heavy armor master even better at low levels!

The Feat is great but this doesn't really make it better. Most of the time enemies attacking you won't be at such a disadvantage.

[Giant2005]

Or the str 8 Rogue is disarmed and has nothing to attack with except his fists. Then, despite being only slightly weaker than the population at large, his punches are suddenly harmless.

This is pretty off-topic at this point but I'd like to point out that the notion of an * str person only being slightly weaker than the population at large is a bit of a fallacy.
Sure pre-statted things tend to be rather weak but if the DM was creating his NPCs, 8 Str is actually significantly below the norm. The average on a 4d6D1 is 12.24 and with a +1 racial modifier, the average strength for a human is 13.24; That 8 Str guy only has 60.42% of the Strength of the typical person.

[jkat718]

This actually happened to my character today! One of my party members insists on introducing my Cleric as his Paladin's personal butler, named "Jeeves." Because my character took a vow of silence as part of his order's rites, he can't protest. When he did this again, but this time to the king, I'd finally had enough and the Cleric smacked the Paladin upside the head. Because my build is primarily DEX- and WIS-based, my STR is 8 (the minimum for point buy), so my unarmed strikes couldn't deal any damage. :smallbiggrin:

[Demonic Spoon]

This is pretty off-topic at this point but I'd like to point out that the notion of an * str person only being slightly weaker than the population at large is a bit of a fallacy.
Sure pre-statted things tend to be rather weak but if the DM was creating his NPCs, 8 Str is actually significantly below the norm. The average on a 4d6D1 is 12.24 and with a +1 racial modifier, the average strength for a human is 13.24; That 8 Str guy only has 60.42% of the Strength of the typical person.

I believe the "10 is average" thing came from 3.x (Though I don't recall from where), so technically it doesn't really apply here. However, your logic also doesn't work - adventurers aren't average. Not everyone gets to roll 4d6 and drop 1

[ThermalSlapShot]

I believe the "10 is average" thing came from 3.x (Though I don't recall from where), so technically it doesn't really apply here. However, your logic also doesn't work - adventurers aren't average. Not everyone gets to roll 4d6 and drop 1

Commoner in the DMG basic rules shows the commoner having all 10's. Bandits are a bit better.

Page 53 of basic DMG.

[JFahy]

I believe the "10 is average" thing came from 3.x (Though I don't recall from where), so technically it doesn't really apply here. However, your logic also doesn't work - adventurers aren't average. Not everyone gets to roll 4d6 and drop 1

That assumption is never really discussed but there's evidence of it even in the oldest editions where "roll 3d6 six times" was the default generation method (giving averages of 10.5, of course, for adventurers). It's telling that 10 has always remained the 'no modifier' level for nearly every stat, and IIRC the first DMG tossed out the idea that a character's IQ was about their Intelligence times ten. (The ideal for IQ tests was that the average performance in the target population would be 100.)

I've never really liked the idea that commoners are slouching around with a bunch of single-digit stats while the adventurers with their 10.5+ averages are the master race. It's more appealing to me that the PCs start out with not-so-extraordinary stats and it's their heroic actions that begin to set them apart.

[ThermalSlapShot]

That assumption is never really discussed but there's evidence of it even in the oldest editions where "roll 3d6 six times" was the default generation method (giving averages of 10.5, of course, for adventurers). It's telling that 10 has always remained the 'no modifier' level for nearly every stat, and IIRC the first DMG tossed out the idea that a character's IQ was about their Intelligence times ten. (The ideal for IQ tests was that the average performance in the target population would be 100.)

I've never really liked the idea that commoners are slouching around with a bunch of single-digit stats while the adventurers with their 10.5+ averages are the master race. It's more appealing to me that the PCs start out with not-so-extraordinary stats and it's their heroic actions that begin to set them apart.

Page 53 of Basic DMG shows Commoners as 10's across the board. It also says "any race" which means that races that aren't PCs may not get racial ability score bonuses.

*shrug*

[ImSAMazing]

In most other editions, you got around the problem of attacks (like unarmed strikes with less than 10 strength) doing 0 or even negative damage (healing punches!) with the fact that there was a minimum damage. But I can't find such a rule in the PHB or DMG. Is it really not there, or am I just missing it?

Why would a 8 strength creature use a weapon? He is probably a caster so he could also cast a cantrip...

[Chronos]

Or he might be using weapons with his dex.

[PoeticDwarf]

In most other editions, you got around the problem of attacks (like unarmed strikes with less than 10 strength) doing 0 or even negative damage (healing punches!) with the fact that there was a minimum damage. But I can't find such a rule in the PHB or DMG. Is it really not there, or am I just missing it?

In our camp. every attack deals a minimum of 1 damage. But it isn't a rule, you're right.

[PoeticDwarf]

Why would a 8 strength creature use a weapon? He is probably a caster so he could also cast a cantrip...

Maybe if you're a DEX based fighter who lost his weapon. So you uses an alternative.

[SharkForce]

Page 53 of Basic DMG shows Commoners as 10's across the board. It also says "any race" which means that races that aren't PCs may not get racial ability score bonuses.

*shrug*

the monster manual basically tells you to modify stats by race for NPCs if the race says "any race". not sure about the DMG. but if it doesn't, it's probably just a matter of having copied the stat block without copying the rule that explains that partciular part of the stat block.

[Slipperychicken]

Very well, then, if we want to be pedantic, the str 8 dexterity fighter instead. And let's say he's been grappled by a rogue with a +10 to athletics and has that feature that prevents him from rolling below a 10 (in other words, it's impossible to get out of the grapple).

AFB, but can't people use dex(acrobatics) to escape grapples too?

[ThermalSlapShot]

AFB, but can't people use dex(acrobatics) to escape grapples too?

Yes.

And to use the action "Climb onto a bigger creature", which is essentially a mount+grapple action.

[D.U.P.A.]

The Feat is great but this doesn't really make it better. Most of the time enemies attacking you won't be at such a disadvantage.

This is totally broken at low levels, where enemies have like 1d6+1 dmg, so you must roll at least 3 on the dice, considering you manage to beat its 18 ac with +2 attack bonus...

[ThermalSlapShot]

This is totally broken at low levels, where enemies have like 1d6+1 dmg, so you must roll at least 3 on the dice, considering you manage to beat its 18 ac with +2 attack bonus...

Yes the Feat is good/great at low levels, I'm not saying otherwise.

But the "no minimum damage" doesn't make the Feat any better than it already is.

[Slipperychicken]

Yes the Feat is good/great at low levels, I'm not saying otherwise.

But the "no minimum damage" doesn't make the Feat any better than it already is.

The difference between 1 and zero damage is fairly significant at low levels where every hit point matters, and many enemies can deal 3 or less damage on a hit.

It's good at low levels, but still wouldn't call it broken, though. Maybe the damage resistance should scale with proficiency to keep it relevant as enemy damage increases.

[SharkForce]

heavy armour mastery stays relevant by the enemy getting more attacks (either by there being more of them, or they just hit more often, or they have more attacks).

but it probably wouldn't break anything to make it proficiency mod. seriously though, still good at level 20. just not as ridiculously good.

[ThermalSlapShot]

The difference between 1 and zero damage is fairly significant at low levels where every hit point matters, and many enemies can deal 3 or less damage on a hit.

It's good at low levels, but still wouldn't call it broken, though. Maybe the damage resistance should scale with proficiency to keep it relevant as enemy damage increases.

Yes, but no minimum damage doesn't change anything.

You would take 0 damage either way due to minimum damage. If the goblin attacks for 0 - 3 slashing damage you are still taking 0 damage no matter what the minimum damage is as long as the minimum damage is 3 or less.

This ruling has no effect on HAM, it doesn't make it better or worse.

I'm not saying how good or bad HAM is, I'm saying that this ruling has no bearing on HAM.

[rhouck]

Yes, but no minimum damage doesn't change anything.

You would take 0 damage either way due to minimum damage. If the goblin attacks for 0 - 3 slashing damage you are still taking 0 damage no matter what the minimum damage is as long as the minimum damage is 3 or less.

This ruling has no effect on HAM, it doesn't make it better or worse.

I'm not saying how good or bad HAM is, I'm saying that this ruling has no bearing on HAM.

The disagreement is when you apply the "minimum damage rule". People that apply it would apply it AFTER HAM takes effect. I.e., if an attack hits, HAM would reduce it by 3, but can't reduce it below 1 (even if it was 0-3). So yes, there it does affect HAM.

You are interpreting HAM as being able to reduce attacks to 0, which goes against the houserule of "all attacks deal at least 1 damage".

[thereaper]

This is pretty off-topic at this point but I'd like to point out that the notion of an * str person only being slightly weaker than the population at large is a bit of a fallacy.
Sure pre-statted things tend to be rather weak but if the DM was creating his NPCs, 8 Str is actually significantly below the norm. The average on a 4d6D1 is 12.24 and with a +1 racial modifier, the average strength for a human is 13.24; That 8 Str guy only has 60.42% of the Strength of the typical person.

An 8 Str character can carry 120 lbs on their back. The idea of a person like that being physically incapable of hurting someone with a punch is even more nonsensical than healing punches (which could at least be explained away as magic).

[PoeticDwarf]

This is pretty off-topic at this point but I'd like to point out that the notion of an * str person only being slightly weaker than the population at large is a bit of a fallacy.
Sure pre-statted things tend to be rather weak but if the DM was creating his NPCs, 8 Str is actually significantly below the norm. The average on a 4d6D1 is 12.24 and with a +1 racial modifier, the average strength for a human is 13.24; That 8 Str guy only has 60.42% of the Strength of the typical person.

A normal person has a strenght of 10 not 13.24.
And if you look realistic. A rogue with a DEX of 20 is more than 60.42% higher than a commoner with a strenght of 10.

[SowZ]

Or the str 8 Rogue is disarmed and has nothing to attack with except his fists. Then, despite being only slightly weaker than the population at large, his punches are suddenly harmless.

Pretty reasonable. Honestly, if the average commoner has 4 HP, a punch that does 1/4 of their health would be a fairly devastating punch. People can take serious damage before collapsing.

[ronlugge]

Fair call. Although I think it'd still be pretty rare unless the players were intentionally gimping their characters.

Tell that to the barbarian who wacked a gray ooze 5 times in a row with his greatsword. (I think it was a gray ooze, but whatever type of ooze it was, each wack applied a permanent -1 dmg malus to his weapon).

[coredump]

Crawford has recently tweeted confirmation of now mimimum damage.

In 1E, the average PC stat was supposed to be 10.5.... but the average 'commoner' was supposed to be a 9. On average, PCs were more 'elite' to start with. (Of course, there were also no stat boosts back then.)