Consider this house rule for traditional D&D:
When an attack roll misses, the attacker suffers damage from the defender.
This gives every attack roll the potential of loss as well as gain. Damage inflicted by the defender would be based on the equivalent of a basic attack as situationally appropriate. For example, someone attacking a dragon from behind and missing might take tail swipe damage.
How do you think it would change the game?
This shares some properties with what I have called monological combat before, though it remains more firmly within the familiar D&D approach to combat turns. See also: monological combat example and monological save versus magic.
Some potential consequences I can see include:
- Encourage avoidance behaviors because attacking feels riskier.
- Decrease the sense of stasis caused by several misses in a row.
- Speed up combat by increasing average damage per round.
- Cut down hoards of unchallenging enemies quickly.
- Decrease the defensive value of armor.
Given a choice as a player, would you like to use this house rule? Why or why not?