Counter Skill on mobs miss too please! not only on evade

[Sav]

You can use Feint despite whether the mob evaded or you missed them. So why not use the same mechanic for evasion-dependent skills?

[Lienn]

You can use Feint despite whether the mob evaded or you missed them. So why not use the same mechanic for evasion-dependent skills?

Because, feint is always an action of yours. So it can be triggered in both cases. The player actions' are attacking, blocking, parrying and evading. Miss is a possible action of those that attacked so miss only counts for players if the attacks are theirs.

[Mudd]

Maybe make the counters work on Misses as well but make them a bit weaker, then make them critical on Evades to leave moves like Feathfoot still really useful?

The counters on Miss would be weaker because hes just taking advantage of the enemies foul up.
When he Evades, it was a skillful dodge, which allows him to use the opportunity to strike the enemy a bit more effectively.

[Chinook]

Signed up.

[Ichi]

The question isn't why not, it's why? Why do we need to give it to misses too? Besides convenience what will this effect, is it possible that it could have a negative effect? I think so. Too many people asking for simplification in too many areas imo.

[hotah]

I agree, if the mob misses he leaves himself open for an attack in the same way as if you evade. Its not that I don't understand the difference, I just disagree that one leaves one more vulnerable than the other.

[Preypacer]

I agree, if the mob misses he leaves himself open for an attack in the same way as if you evade. Its not that I don't understand the difference, I just disagree that one leaves one more vulnerable than the other.

It's not a question of the mobs vulunerability after a miss. It's a question of your character's preparedness to counter at that moment.

[Ichi]

If you swing at me while im walking away from you you might miss but i am no better prepared to commit a counteraction now than i would be if your punch made contact.

You can imagine that a punch would have an awfully hard time missing a target unless the target was too far, weather your punch was short or i stepped back im in no position to counter as i must first close that distance. If I physically divert your punch then I must be within striking distance and capable of countering.

There is obviously a mathematical difference between a function missing a point and a point actively deterring a function from intersecting.

This is just another case of, convenience vs complexity. You want it to count for misses to because that would be more convenient. I on the other hand would rather have the complexity of this added element and deal with the minor annoyance, it just doesn't compare to the value i hold for the complexity it brings so i can't mind it.

[hotah]

That's what a counter is, a reaction to an opening. I don't agree with your view on it is all I'm saying.

[Zak]

But haymaker is not a reaction to an opening, it's creating an opening by evading in a certain way. You don't just strike at the foe when they don't hit you, you first evade the attack in a way that leaves them open to your counterattack and then you punch'em in the face.