Ok, but I still dont see why not just call it Damage, then it would be Damage dice roll vs Defence (Should perhaps be Armor) dice roll, once Precision and Dodge rolls are resolved.

The reason being that it more logical and immersive, "Attack" just reminds me more towards "To Hit"

And it would make more sense to have a Broadsword say "Initiativ +1, Damage +11".

Accuracy vs dodge determines if your characters hit and is calculated each time you 'attack' a target. Does 'attack' not properly explain what your character is doing? Does 'damage' somehow explain this better?

.... Are you drunk?

Edit: I completly misunderstood what you wanted to change, haha. Maybe i'm drunk >.>

In any case it's mostly an issue with semantics.

Yeah, 'Offense' or 'Damage' would be alright.

It's mostly a point of fine semantics, but currently it's Attack/Defense (which pair logically... but they define damage, not accuracy) and Accuracy/Dodge.

Somewhat related, they need to show Spell Mastery/Spell Resist % chances of success in a tooltip in battle when casting resistable spells.

... come to think of it, the Critical Chance doesn't show a % value at all, so I have no idea how valuable the +crit trait is.

I too am used to Attack/Defense affecting to hit, not damage values. I would switch Attack/Defense to Damage/Armor.

what thay said

Am I the only one who doesn't associate "Attack" with "to hit"?  Attack has always been associated with damage in my mind.  The closest thing I can think of for attacking meaning to hit, is D&D, but even there it's called "Attack Bonus", not just Attack. 

Maybe I'm just playing different games?

Rename.