Eternity Graze is a terrible mechanic

[Daidre]

I like testing things. I do not like when I need excel sheet to make a choice between +10% Attack Speed and +30% Damage bonus, because you need to account diminishing returns from all your items and feats for proper estimate.

And about bonuses - Might is multiplicative with PL in Deadfire and that makes it top stat for casters. But trashy for all martials since its additive with weapon enchantments and feats. Extra trashy for rogue thanks to sneak attack. Good luck identifying this without system knowledge, because it is completely contrary to how you expect it to work in RPG.

So main problem with percents - in most cases you'll get less that stated in description, sometimes to the point of feat being suboptimal, like modal for -5 Acc and +20% Damage that always reduces output of the Rogue when you check the math.

And honor mention to Int that nerfs DPS from your own dots by increase in duration.

But honestly, why even talk about math with a guy who's best argument is "lolol" and who probably never played POE...

 

[Sacred82]

I like testing things. I do not like when I need excel sheet to make a choice between +10% Attack Speed and +30% Damage bonus, because you need to account diminishing returns from all your items and feats for proper estimate.

Or you can just, you know, play the game.

Attack speed is admittedly the one vital statistic in the game that is really obscure. From my playing I could only tell that attack speed bonus =/= attack speed bonus.

The most realistic analysis I could find on the net claimed that attack speed bonuses only affect the recovery phase (just like armor speed penalty claims to be only a recovery speed penalty), and that Dex is the one thing that affects speed in all phases. I don't think that this is 100% true because Dex speed bonus is marginal unless boosted to very high levels.

Anyway, attack speed is one thing that you either focus on, you try to keep reasonable (just leave Dex at 10 and maybe don't use heaviest armors) or you deliberately don't give a fuck about (dual wielders can still be very effective with Dex dumped to minimum, or e.g. Barbarians may focus on big splash damage instead of attack speed). Then the question is if you focus on Might OR Perception OR both (on glass cannons). So your choice would depend on your build first of all. And then you could still... test both things.

And about bonuses - Might is multiplicative with PL in Deadfire and that makes it top stat for casters. But trashy for all martials since its additive with weapon enchantments and feats. Extra trashy for rogue thanks to sneak attack. Good luck identifying this without system knowledge, because it is completely contrary to how you expect it to work in RPG.

yeah I can't talk about Deadfire, haven't really been playing it yet.

But yes Pillars is counter intuitive at first. "Ok I want a fast DPS, so I'll max Dex and dual wield" yeah except no, dual wielding is fucking fast at default Dex, still pretty fast with Dex dumped to minimum, and not much faster with max Dex. At the same time you're losing damage per hit compared to two-handed weapons, accuracy compared to a single one-handed weapon, and the defensive bonuses of a shield. IOW, it's mostly a hackjob solution for trying to get more efficiency out of an unfocused build.

So main problem with percents - in most cases you'll get less that stated in description, sometimes to the point of feat being suboptimal, like modal for -5 Acc and +20% Damage that always reduces output of the Rogue when you check the math.

uhm… yeah. So your rogue already does +100% damage per hit on debuffed enemies. Another +20% is not significant unless… two-handed weapons. And even then, you can't kill something deader than dead. Surplus damage is definitely a thing in Pillars. If a -5 accuracy actually noticeably diminishes your damage output, well… If you tend to just barely hit things and now your grazes go up, probably. The Rogue was advertised as a super high accuracy character, but his natural accuracy isn't better than that of a Fighter or Monk. And since a huge Damage Bonus is guaranteed, you will want to focus on accuracy with the Rogue when it comes to stats and equipment. And in that case, the -5 acc may turn a crit into a hit, big loss in damage.

But most of this stuff is obvious when you think about it, just counter intuitive when you're used to RPG conventions.

And honor mention to Int that nerfs DPS from your own dots by increase in duration.

this is another obscure (but marginal?) thing. I assume you mean DoT effects? "Ticks" happen every 3 seconds… apparently. If it says "does X damage over time for Y seconds" that would mean there are Y/3 ticks, each doing X/(Y/3) damage. Now duration is Y+Y*Int duration bonus (let's call it D), so now there'll be D/3 ticks, each still doing X/(Y/3) damage… I think. Otherwise, damage per tick would be affected by Int instead of (or together with) Might. But damage over time is still damage, not duration. Anyway, pretty marginal, all things considered. Mebbe just don't max Int if you want to go DoT… spell damage in general, actually.

But honestly, why even talk about math with a guy who's best argument is "lolol" and who probably never played POE...

you're right, never heard of this PoE. I thought we were talking Dungeons & Dragons: Tactics

 

[Ismaul]

So the purpose of Grazing was most likely not so much a sop to casuals

It was:

The mechanics I've engineered for PoE were largely based on my experiences watching a wide variety of players run through the RPGs I've worked on from Icewind Dale to F:NV. E.g.: wild damage curves and all or nothing effects regularly frustrate a lot of people. Graze was added to normalize those effects over time. The Miss/Graze/Hit/Crit windows are always the same and I don't think they're notably more complex than variable Crit ranges, Crit multipliers, and rolling to confirm in 3.X.

But this thread is not about PoE or its implementation of grazing. It's about graze as a mechanic.

Also, Sawyer isn't saying that this is a mechanic for casuals, he's saying that all-or nothing effects are frustrating to many. That's not the same at all. He says graze is used to normalize effects over time, so in fact he is talking about granularity of attack outcomes. It has fuckall to do with casuals.

Designers pandering to casuals don't go: "Hey let's add more complicated mechanics to satisfy casuals." FFS. And I laugh at so-called hardcore / non-causals that cry at seeing more complexity in their games (and not pointless complexity, but one that can lead to increased build options for one). Maybe they should rethink if they're not the casuals themselves.

 

[Ismaul]

Just look at those casuals arguing against graze:

I do think in general graze just makes things overly complicated for complications sake. If I can't calculate to a good degree of accuracy chance to hit and average damage per round in my head I feel uncomfortable in an RPG.

muh complication too big for brain

I do not like when I need excel sheet to make a choice between +10% Attack Speed and +30% Damage bonus, because you need to account diminishing returns from all your items and feats for proper estimate.

muh excel sheet

A hit feels exciting. I hit! Yes! Woops fill the air. Fists are bumped. Damage dice are rolled.

A miss feels bad. Dammit! I missed! Dice are flung across the table in frustration, fists strike tables.

A graze is just... meh. Like porridge, or cricket.

muh feels

 

[Sacred82]

Just look at those casuals arguing against graze:

I do think in general graze just makes things overly complicated for complications sake. If I can't calculate to a good degree of accuracy chance to hit and average damage per round in my head I feel uncomfortable in an RPG.

muh complication too big for brain

I do not like when I need excel sheet to make a choice between +10% Attack Speed and +30% Damage bonus, because you need to account diminishing returns from all your items and feats for proper estimate.

muh excel sheet

it's a case of "lol the cashuls are ruining teh hardcore fer me. Btw weighing things against each other is too hard for my autism"

It's interesting to browse "character builds" on Obs' Pillars forum. You'll find practically nothing but two different results of autism: one-trick pony characters (e.g. uber tanks that can't deal damage worth shit) or characters for soloing where the OP doesn't give a fuck about party synergies. You may have beaten the game Iron Man PotD with party or solo that way, I don't give a shit. The game allows for enough cheese (literally, fucking cheap food buffs out the ass) that you can beat it any which way whatsoever. Thing is the mechanics are deep enough to allow for very effective tanks that can still deal some damage, for very effective damage dealers that won't succumb to an AoE farted in their general direction, etc.

And it's probably exactly those people who want to be teh hardcowres who haven't come to grips with those mechanics.

"I want to know how different choices work out in advance down to a single point of damage but I don't want to keep a spreadsheet" - retarded

"I want to calculate every single point of damage but it shouldn't get too complicated" - retarded

"lol dis game sucks because I won without giving a shit about stats just using cheese. EAAAAZY." - retarded

"Pillars is teh cashul, just make two tanks with nothing but defensive stats and a tower shield and four glass cannons and roll over errything" - better but still retarded

 

[Yosharian]

A hit feels exciting. I hit! Yes! Woops fill the air. Fists are bumped. Damage dice are rolled.

A miss feels bad. Dammit! I missed! Dice are flung across the table in frustration, fists strike tables.

A graze is just... meh. Like porridge, or cricket.

muh feels

Are you denying that emotions are integral to a good gaming experience? Does it not feel good when an amazing piece of loot drops? Does it not feel good when a critical hit (at least, a D&D one) happens?

If your point is that my post was about feelings, then duh. I'm fully aware that my post only addresses the emotional side of the argument. Graze is a logical mechanic - it makes sense from a mathematical point of view. My point was that such an analysis ignores the emotional aspect of HIT and CRIT and MISS. Graze is just a non-entity, emotionally.

We need to consider both aspects when analyzing whether graze is, indeed, a 'terrible' mechanic.

 

[Ismaul]

My point here is simply that graze mechanics have nothing to do with casualization. Hell, arguments against grazing can even be construed as pro-casual arguments.

 

[Sacred82]

My point here is simply that graze mechanics have nothing to do with casualization. Hell, arguments against grazing can even be construed as pro-casual arguments.

Nothing to construe here, that's a perfectly valid suspicion.

1. Personally I've never read a post on the official forums ever during development that said "herro I'm Mya-Aiko me Engrish not so good I like good story and much love characters good friends but I don't like fighty-fight because me arrways miss. Sorry bother u"
"Hi there Mya-Aiko-Chan ^.^ Don't worry, we're designing Pillars with all our players in mind. In fact those include mostly very special human beings like you. We're taking great care to make sure you'll never feel left out or "left behind" just because you can't "hit bad people" who don't want to be hit. I have a feeling Pillars will be just the game for you. Love, Josh"

if you can point me to your relevant "muh cashuls ruined erryting Pillars" sources, do so.

2. It r cumpliketed is an argument that seems to come up p. often. That's an argument of casuals, you really don't have any room for construing here. People who aren't that honest say "it's too obscure to do proper calculations", well pal, the systems are obvious enough for p. much anyone to get an idea of it. Other than that, you have to actually play it and try things out. I've read several analyses of mechanics and they seemed inconclusive/ illogical and never 1:1 what I could confirm from playing the game. Statements like "heavy armor never matters for guns because it only affects recovery and not attack or reloading" and on the other hand "dude with guns best be nekkid", both of which aren't generally true. Attributes and abilities tend to influence things in very small increments so it really depends a lot on build, and even then, differ with playstyle and party setup, and there just aren't that many loopholes to exploit.

There just aren't that many loopholes to exploit.

Maybe that's how you identfiy the casuals among the hardcores. People who want to find shit (how many sources do you consult to do that btw?) that they can keep milking to get through the game as fast as possible (but on the highest difficulty because I went to bee teh hardcow) so they can move on to the next game or shitpost about this one's lack of quality writing.

 

[Ismaul]

In any case, you don't deal with casuals by adding mechanics to casualize the game -- most likely if you're going to modify mechanics for casuals you'd remove or automatize some.

Instead, the right way to help out casuals without fucking the game for everyone would be to make a casual difficulty mode. Especially if the criticism is "I miss too much I can't into buffs", which is easily handled by reducing Target numbers for hitting on the player side. So if the graze mechanic was a way to pander to casuals, it's terrible by any measure. Fortunately that's not what it's designed for.

 

[Fairfax]

So the purpose of Grazing was most likely not so much a sop to casuals

It was:

The mechanics I've engineered for PoE were largely based on my experiences watching a wide variety of players run through the RPGs I've worked on from Icewind Dale to F:NV. E.g.: wild damage curves and all or nothing effects regularly frustrate a lot of people. Graze was added to normalize those effects over time. The Miss/Graze/Hit/Crit windows are always the same and I don't think they're notably more complex than variable Crit ranges, Crit multipliers, and rolling to confirm in 3.X.

But this thread is not about PoE or its implementation of grazing. It's about graze as a mechanic.

The original post is, as is the post I replied to.

Also, Sawyer isn't saying that this is a mechanic for casuals, he's saying that all-or nothing effects are frustrating to many. That's not the same at all. He says graze is used to normalize effects over time, so in fact he is talking about granularity of attack outcomes. It has fuckall to do with casuals.

Casuals are the most vocal about misses and all-or-nothing being frustrating, and that has been the case since the RPG was created. The vast majority of players aren't system masters, and that includes developers themselves. Sawyer once talked about how many members of the IWD team couldn't get past past an area he designed, even though they had plenty of experience with IE games and D&D in general. Same goes for PoE devs not getting past the first bear on Hard, etc.

Designers pandering to casuals don't go: "Hey let's add more complicated mechanics to satisfy casuals." FFS. And I laugh at so-called hardcore / non-causals that cry at seeing more complexity in their games (and not pointless complexity, but one that can lead to increased build options for one). Maybe they should rethink if they're not the casuals themselves.

Except Sawyer himself said it's not more complex (or at least he didn't think it was), so that wasn't the goal.

Anyway, I didn't say grazes are dumbed down. The user I quoted said they weren't a 'sop for casuals', and Sawyer made it clear that they were, even though it's only a psychological one. The mechanic's purpose in PoE was to achieve similar results while making players feel less frustrated about their rolls. Sawyer even called grazes a 'consolation prize' at the time, and said that relying on them shouldn't be a viable strategy.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Sacred82 I can't tell if I'm casual or hardcore. I like to play on hard difficulty settings but I don't like to analyze or calculate builds. I do like to find unconvential ways through the game by trying new techniques of character building, even if it's recommended against. I haven't found an RPG yet that didn't allow me to progress the game because I utterly destroyed my character build. I still like to use my brain but it's about enjoyment and using underdog tactics for me, mostly. Does that make me teh hardc0rez or teh cashuals?

 

[Sacred82]

In any case, you don't deal with casuals by adding mechanics to casualize the game -- most likely if you're going to modify mechanics for casuals you'd remove or automatize some.

Instead, the right way to help out casuals without fucking the game for everyone would be to make a casual difficulty mode. Especially if the criticism is "I miss too much I can't into buffs", which is easily handled by reducing Target numbers for hitting on the player side. So if the graze mechanic was a way to pander to casuals, it's terrible by any measure. Fortunately that's not what it's designed for.

I mean, the selling point was that it would be a throwback to Infinity Engine games. How interesting to casuals are isometric RPG's with full party creation? Dumbing down the entire game would make no sense in the first place.

They did add Story Mode, but that's only logical when you already have difficulty affecting options out the ass. That's a problem in itself IMO.

Grazes won't win you the game, quite simply. Unless you're playing on a low difficulty and that just shouldn't be our concern (though I guess enemies also have lower deflection in that case so grazes are again not central to the picture) . On PotD you can build a character around low hit chance and it can still be effective, but that's not the stuff of casuals. Definitely not since they've introduced a small margin for misses; you can't just go "fuck yeah I'll dump Perception on everyone, fuck accuracy". That could in fact happen if devs didn't account for misses at all; the way it is now, you have to take care not to ruin your hit chance completely while maximizing your damage stat if you want to go with that kind of build.

Also, would casuals approach the game by saying "ok, I'll probably have to kill things. I think I'll just dump Perception into the fucking ground even though it says here that it makes me actually hit things?"

Question concerning the above: I've only played PotD for any amount of time. On Normal or Easy... how much of a difference is there in monsters' deflection compared to PotD? Because… it's quite possible that those cashuls very rarely if ever see a graze happen even if they attack with pants on head.

 

[Ismaul]

Fairfax
Again, how are casuals better helped by adding a graze mechanic rather than a lower difficulty option?

And do you think Sawyer is such a retard that he wasn't aware different difficulties already fixed casuals' inability to hit reliably because they don't master the system?

 

[Sacred82]

Sacred82 I can't tell if I'm casual or hardcore. I like to play on hard difficulty settings but I don't like to analyze or calculate builds. I do like to find unconvential ways through the game by trying new techniques of character building, even if it's recommended against. I haven't found an RPG yet that didn't allow me to progress the game because I utterly destroyed my character build. I still like to use my brain but it's about enjoyment and using underdog tactics for me, mostly. Does that make me teh hardc0rez or teh cashuals?

You should ask the axepurts on this. They say cashuls ruin things by just being casual while teh hardcows are perpetually winning because they've got Tiger Blood.

I would argue that if you're a regular poster on the Kodex you identify with the hardcore crowd, because there is such a thing, it's just not as homogenous a group as some seem to think it is. If you like to actually spend time thinking about a hobby beyond simply practicing it, you're a hardcore whatever. Gun nut, music lover, gamer. You don't have to stress it though because you're aware you're spending a lot of mental effort on something that is just a pastime.

tl;dr you're Fluent, a very special case. You might just be our own personal Mya-Aiko-Chan, or you might be the most hardcore of all, just with crippling ADHD. Hope this helps

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

PotD is the only mode where you even need to care about stats at all.

 

[Ismaul]

I've only played PotD for any amount of time. On Normal or Easy... how much of a difference is there in monsters' deflection compared to PotD? Because… it's quite possible that those cashuls very rarely if ever see a graze happen even if they attack with pants on head.

Good point man. I too did only PotD, which adds +15 to all enemy defenses.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

You should ask the axepurts on this. They say cashuls ruin things by just being casual while teh hardcows are perpetually winning because they've got Tiger Blood.

I would argue that if you're a regular poster on the Kodex you identify with the hardcore crowd, because there is such a thing, it's just not as homogenous a group as some seem to think it is. If you like to actually spend time thinking about a hobby beyond simply practicing it, you're a hardcore whatever. Gun nut, music lover, gamer. You don't have to stress it though because you're aware you're spending a lot of mental effort on something that is just a pastime.

tl;dr you're Fluent, a very special case. You might just be our own personal Mya-Aiko-Chan, or you might be the most hardcore of all, just with crippling ADHD. Hope this helps

I don't think I'm Mya-Aiko-Chan as I do really try to self-learn the systems and I'm a systems geek, just not as hardcore as those who calculate builds. I find that kind of cheating honestly, more-so looking up builds and how to perfect a build, so I might look up what a stat or ability does but I won't look up ways to break the system or how to build a perfect character. If I eventually learn that on my own, cool, if I don't master the system I still have fun with the game and will complete it.

Thank you for the response broski.

 

[Fairfax]

Fairfax
Again, how are casuals better helped by adding a graze mechanic rather than a lower difficulty option?

And do you think Sawyer is such a retard that he wasn't aware different difficulties already fixed casuals' inability to hit reliably because they don't master the system?

It's about player psychology, not difficulty. A low-damage hit feels better to the average player than a complete miss. Tim Cain's Reboot Develop presentation had good portions about this, and he also talked about how people don't understand randomness. Sawyer has seen plenty of such reactions and feedback over the years, and they're even more frequent and obvious in PnP, which he's played a lot. Making rolls feel better was important enough to him that he even considered removing misses entirely, but people complained about wanting to play dodge-based builds and he changed his mind.

 

[Ismaul]

It's about player psychology, not difficulty.

So it's not about casuals? GG

 

[Sacred82]

Fairfax
Again, how are casuals better helped by adding a graze mechanic rather than a lower difficulty option?

And do you think Sawyer is such a retard that he wasn't aware different difficulties already fixed casuals' inability to hit reliably because they don't master the system?

It's about player psychology, not difficulty. A low-damage hit feels better to the average player than a complete miss.

"being cashul is about feeling good, no matter how tough the game is"

Tim Cain's Reboot Develop presentation had good portions about this, and he also talked about how people don't understand randomness.

"Hmm… sometimes I hit for 10 damage, and sometimes it says I graze for 5 damage, but I didn't do anything different. This almost seems… random."

Sawyer has seen plenty of such reactions and feedback over the years, and they're even more frequent and obvious in PnP, which he's played a lot.

Making rolls feel better was important enough to him that he even considered removing misses entirely, but people complained about wanting to play dodge-based builds and he changed his mind.

Ok, the Josh myth making retard is strong in you. Carry on.

 

[Ismaul]

Fairfax
You argue that the reason graze has been implemented is that grazes feel better than misses to a lot of players. (Not saying I disagree.)

But ITT people have been arguing that grazes suck as a mechanic because they don't feel good, unlike crits which are perfectly fine 'cause of them crit feels.

So which is it? How do grazes fix the player feels, if they feel like shit?

Given what's been said ITT, a better way to fix the feels would just be to add more chance to hit rather than grazes. In other words, reduce difficulty. A good solution for casuals, unlike grazing. Or hey, how about we call grazes "hits", hits "crits", and crits "m-m-m-monster crits", like I suggested earlier for the feels crowd? Feels fixed?

 

[Sacred82]

Fairfax
You argue that the reason graze has been implemented is that grazes feel better than misses to a lot of players. (Not saying I disagree.)

But ITT people have been arguing that grazes suck as a mechanic because they don't feel good, unlike crits which are perfectly fine 'cause of them crit feels.

not saying that the reasons why the game ended up the way it did (and Josh is really just the figurehead that people point at) isn't interesting, but that's not really the point we're arguing about here.

People saying "cashuls like grazes cuz dem feels" are moving the goal posts of this discussion. Maybe cashuls also like swords & sorcery themes and faux medieval worlds, me too, that's why I'm playing fantasy RPG's. At most that means that there's a common ground between people who buy the same games, news at 11.

The point of this discussion is wether grazes are a good mechanic or not. You don't try to discredit things based on wether someone else likes them, unless you're retarded.

 

[Ismaul]

I'm just using the reductio ad absurdum strategy here Sacred82.

I've said myself that the point of the discussion is to assess the value of graze itself as a mechanic. And independently of PoE's implementation of it at that. So we agree.

But, it's also true that good design takes into account moment-to-moment gameplay experience. So the discussion on feels is not entirely out of place, as long as it doesn't veer into the subjective and anecdotal. I'd argue that granularity of attack outcomes would be something positive for the experience of both casuals and hardcore players alike, reducing the swinginess of binary outcomes (and the frustration some might feel over it) and allowing for more complex and different builds (for example those that invest at different levels in accuracy and/or dodge abilities).

Still, like you said, grazes won't fix the game for casuals, because always grazing due to shitty a character build will just turn the game into an tedious exercise in grinding down HPs. In that sense, graze is a casual's trap. Lowering difficulty (as in lowering target numbers / enemy defenses) is the only fix for casuals, aside from gitting gud (the superior option).

 

[Sacred82]

I'm just using the reductio ad absurdum strategy here Sacred82

I just wanted to bring the conversation back on track without having to wait for… more hearsay about Josh Sawyer's digestive tract and how it explains Pillar's design.

But, it's also true that good design takes into account moment-to-moment gameplay experience. So the discussion on feels is not entirely out of place, as long as it doesn't veer into the subjective and anecdotal.

Yes, it isn't, but this discussion is bound to be subjective. Fairfax claimed that implementing grazes for cashuls had nothing to do with difficulty but 'psychology', whatever he means by that (if he even knows it). Let's say it's about muh feels. And caring about the experience itself without being, in the first place, occupied with difficulty is in fact a mindset of hardcores. As long as I'm having fun in a game I don't care too much about difficulty; if the game proves too easy without much digging into its mechanics, it's probably going to get boring to me (or to us) quickly. If the game got too easy after digging very deeply into the mechanics... well, I'd argue that's something that you should acknowledge as a shortcoming on your part. The game was meant to be played, not deconstructed. You chose to do so to enjoy the game more; but no one forces you to exploit all, if any, of the loopholes you may find.

While we're on the subject, I'd say it's a bullshit claim anyone really loves grazing enemies for -50% damage... definitely in a game with damage reduction. Let's stay with PoE. Right at the start of the game, you're grazing something with a total of 15 damage, which is reduced to 7.5. After 5 DR... that's a fucking measly 2.5 points of damage. And you can tell by your Endurance in the 30's-40's that the enemy is going to take forever to kill like this. A full hit would have been 10 points of damage. Very fucking different. When I started to play PoE I was put off more by extremely low damage grazes than I would have been by misses. Maybe because I was used to all or nothing systems. Maybe because it's a hardcore thing. Maybe it's even (gasp) a cashul thing, or a thing that concerns both hardcores and cashuls. At any rate, as long as you keep missing, you can tell yourself that everything is going to be right once you start landing a few hits. Consistently scoring low damage grazes that seem to turn the whole thing into a slow war of attrition doesn't really satisfy anyone emotionally, I guess. Not the awesome button crowd, not the mechanics people. Knowing this and acting accordingly can work out satisfactorily (my new char grazes for 10+ points of damage... yiss), but at first, it's off-putting.

I'd argue that granularity of attack outcomes would be something positive for the experience of both casuals and hardcore players alike, reducing the swinginess of binary outcomes (and the frustration some might feel over it) and allowing for more complex and different builds (for example those that invest at different levels in accuracy and/or dodge abilities).

yep, but that pretty much sums up what has been said. I don't really see why anyone has a problem if the traditional miss-hit-crit(crits don't seem to bother anyone) sequence includes an additional step. Misses and grazes go together just fine, there's been a certain false dichotomy to go around ITT (and in the whole discussion, elsewhere). But then some of those who throw shit at grazes don't want crits to be treated as just very accurate hits, apparently. The whole automatic hit/ weapon threat range advocate shiet has a weird smell to it, I'm not sure how to place it. Smells like a cashul (or maybe just retard) argument masquerading as teh hardcow.

 

[HarveyBirdman]

If we didn't have grazing, then cows would starve. If we didn't have cows, we wouldn't have steak. If we wouldn't have steak, we would all blame Lukrame and burn him at the stake (get it?). Ergo, grazing gets good, gustatory grub guzzled down my gullet, you gaping, gay faggot.