Critical Hit Decks/Charts - I don't like 'em

[Mark Hope]

In my current AD&D game, we use a very basic system. A natural 20 is maximum damage. That's all. No other special game-breaking effects. If you roll a natural 20 on the hit roll, you don't need to roll for damage - just assume it's the maximum for whatever damage die you use. The only proviso is that it doesn't apply if you can only hit on a natural 20. A 1 is an automatic miss, no weird fumble effects. Doesn't slow down the game and doesn't unduly punish players when NPCs do it to them. And, sometimes, you get moments like last game where the thief lands two simultaneous triple-damage backstabs against the dragon that killed the party's fighter the previous session - and rolls two natural 20s .

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Mostly agreed for D&D. For other games, like Warhammer Fantasy, bring on the critical hit charts!

That being said, I’ve been known to maim characters now and then. Never arbitrarily, mind you – it’s always been the result of something epic and/or crazy. And I generally allow the obtaining of magitech prostheses and whatnot. This really started in 4e, when I had to find some way of creating an element of risk and danger.

 

[5ekyu]

This is a little bit of a rant about why I don't like Critical Hit/Fumble Decks, charts, etc. It's mostly based off my experiences in d20 games, but I think the sentiment would carry over to any tabletop game.

I think the "special critical hit rule" is one of the worst house rule or optional rule. It's inclusion is a near deal-breaker if I'm joining a game.

Specifically, I nearly de-railed a Pathfinder campaign when I introduced them as a GM. It's been about a decade since then, but seeing the Starfinder Critical desk's release just brings up bad memories.

1) It slows down the game. You have to stop the play and open up a special chart or get out a deck, roll on a table, adjudicate additional effects, and then keep up with lasting injuries.
2) It unfairly punishes characters. Sure, characters get to enjoy a little extra boost in power, but why does it matter if your party's barbarian hacks off the arm of a goblin that's going to die in a turn anyway? But the goblin slicing off the barbarian's arm, and he's hampered for the rest of the campaign? Also, in a given adventure day, the characters are probably going to be the targets of more attack rolls than your monsters (given that your monsters will be dead after a few actions).

I know some will argue, it's only an occasional thing to use a Critical Hit or Fumble. On a d20, you're going to get a Natural 20 or Natural 1 10% of the time. It will happen a lot more than you expect. This means that your characters will be subject to slicing off their own hands on a critical fumble or being decapitated by a lucky kobold.

What do others think? Do you use these optional rules?

I do not like any "natural roll" triggers as i see them typically adding cool festures or such to the dice and i prefer these things to be under the control or umbrella of choices.

So if they are more triggered by "made by x" or degrees of success/failure and choices the player or character makes, i am happier with them.

I am not happy if they require charts or tables **at play** but can be ok if there is a chart that a player chooses from as his "special hit feature" which wont slow down play.

I dont like these if they bypass the core mechanics and inflict "realism" that the system is not really good at handling. So cutting past hit points to severe limbs and break bones - nah. This goes double for effects that hit PCs.

I dont like these usually if every Tom, Dick and Harry can get them, more favoring it as special festures for PCs and highly proficient or dsngerous foes. They should not be IMO routine but exceptional.

 

[5ekyu]

They were and are a lot of fun in Rollmaster though. So much fun.

We differ.

 

[Umbran]

The best (for me, anyway) implementations of such in D&D-like games I have seen ran as follows:

No critical fumbles for anyone.

PCs can make critical hits.

Primary bad guys - like "named NPCs" or end-bosses that have a reasonable chance of appearing more than once - may be able to make critical hits.

Basically, as a GM, I can always adjust my encounters beforehand to take into account the extra damage potential and effects critical hits may put on my monsters. But, in D&D, a 5% chance of having something go horribly awry, with every roll, when applied to the PCs, makes them sad because after only a short while they are all missing eyes and limbs and stuff. After a few levels, they don't seem all that rare and special to the players when they are all living with the accumulating repercussions.

There are games that have such things integrated into their base mechanics and balance - they often handle them better than D&D, and may not need the limitations I'm outlining here.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

IME crits in 5e are very overpowered. I added in crits in S&W and just made them a max damage hit, if I ever run 3e or 5e again I'll probably do that. Crit fumbles are amusing but often too much of a kick in the nuts.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

In my current AD&D game, we use a very basic system. A natural 20 is maximum damage. That's all. No other special game-breaking effects. If you roll a natural 20 on the hit roll, you don't need to roll for damage - just assume it's the maximum for whatever damage die you use. The only proviso is that it doesn't apply if you can only hit on a natural 20. A 1 is an automatic miss, no weird fumble effects. Doesn't slow down the game and doesn't unduly punish players when NPCs do it to them. And, sometimes, you get moments like last game where the thief lands two simultaneous triple-damage backstabs against the dragon that killed the party's fighter the previous session - and rolls two natural 20s .

My system exactly.

 

[Blue]

As I've matured as a gamer, I've grown to dislike really big effects from critical hits. Cut off your leg sort of thing. On the other had, I don't mind when they introduce a bit more variation like 5e, where it's less than the effect of another hit.

But I do have two great critical hit/fumble stories.

First one was in AD&D or AD&D 2nd - whichever had the monk. I was playing a Wizard who had already cast his two spells for the day (no cantrips in those days) and was separated from the party. Two orcs found me and could easily have cleaned the clock with me - and we had frequent character deaths in this game.

I swung my quarterstaff (with my 10 STR) at one orc and fumbled. DM had fumble/critical charts from somewhere (Dragon magazine)? We rolled % and got "Missed, spin around in a complete circle and make the attack again". 20. Rolled % and got some result that just pulped the orc.

I looked at the other one like I had full confidence in beating him and twirled my staff. He ran like crazy.

I am sure I had single digit HPs and had a THAC0 of 20 (the worst).

The other one was the first session of a new campaign set in the FR, playing AD&D 2nd. First session we were press ganged into the crew of a famous pirate with an airship whom was interrupting commerce all over the place. (Airships being extremely rare.) One of the 1st level characters ended up challenging the high level captain to a duel. Captain accepted, thinking to put him in his place. First roll against the pirate king was a crit, something like amputate the leg. We ended up turning that into being seen as badasses and taking over the ship ourselves.

DM rolled with it like a pro. Completely pivoted the campaign to us being in SOO FAR over our head. We had all these powerful magic items and an incredibly rare airship that people wanted, a crew we needed to keep gold flowing to in order to keep their loyalty while convincing them at every turn they couldn't take us on and/or we would do a better job. National forces still hunting the pirates and the ship. Just a lot of fun.

But yeah, for all of that those types of charts take good play, character investment, and all that and throw it out the window. Because statistically those rolls will sooner or later affect the party.

 

[5ekyu]

As I've matured as a gamer, I've grown to dislike really big effects from critical hits. Cut off your leg sort of thing. On the other had, I don't mind when they introduce a bit more variation like 5e, where it's less than the effect of another hit.

But I do have two great critical hit/fumble stories.

First one was in AD&D or AD&D 2nd - whichever had the monk. I was playing a Wizard who had already cast his two spells for the day (no cantrips in those days) and was separated from the party. Two orcs found me and could easily have cleaned the clock with me - and we had frequent character deaths in this game.

I swung my quarterstaff (with my 10 STR) at one orc and fumbled. DM had fumble/critical charts from somewhere (Dragon magazine)? We rolled % and got "Missed, spin around in a complete circle and make the attack again". 20. Rolled % and got some result that just pulped the orc.

I looked at the other one like I had full confidence in beating him and twirled my staff. He ran like crazy.

I am sure I had single digit HPs and had a THAC0 of 20 (the worst).

The other one was the first session of a new campaign set in the FR, playing AD&D 2nd. First session we were press ganged into the crew of a famous pirate with an airship whom was interrupting commerce all over the place. (Airships being extremely rare.) One of the 1st level characters ended up challenging the high level captain to a duel. Captain accepted, thinking to put him in his place. First roll against the pirate king was a crit, something like amputate the leg. We ended up turning that into being seen as badasses and taking over the ship ourselves.

DM rolled with it like a pro. Completely pivoted the campaign to us being in SOO FAR over our head. We had all these powerful magic items and an incredibly rare airship that people wanted, a crew we needed to keep gold flowing to in order to keep their loyalty while convincing them at every turn they couldn't take us on and/or we would do a better job. National forces still hunting the pirates and the ship. Just a lot of fun.

But yeah, for all of that those types of charts take good play, character investment, and all that and throw it out the window. Because statistically those rolls will sooner or later affect the party.

"First roll against the pirate king was a crit, something like amputate the leg. We ended up turning that into being seen as badasses and taking over the ship ourselves."

We were fighting at low levels and worked up to top of a rocky stair and ruin high above ground. Got stuck between giant and other beastie. Watched beasties fall but giant take a few hits as they smashed down PC after PC heading towards a route or TPK.

Gnome got off big wall of fog and a sprll that stunned the giant - still no way to take it down - lept off the edge and was levitating when the giant came out of stun in the fog unable to see... to hear the gnome laughing and mocking him from a little ways in the fog... cue giant moving yo attack the gnome, stepping off the ledge, failing a dex save to catch (as a PC had had to make earlier) - cuz giant not really dextrous - go bounce bounces down the cliffside to die way below.

As the others got up, they had to fish the gnome back in who called hisself Giantkiller from then on.

Sure, doesnt involve a mega roll delivering a super effect to change the outcome, but nonetheless it's one of the types of things we remember most - choices driving outcomes to reverse situations...

 

[jasper]

If I remember right, the first night I used Good hits and Bad misses from the Dragon magazine.
Friday 3 nat 20s 3 nat 1
Saturday 4 nat 20s 2 nat 1
Sunday 6 nat 20s.
During 2E we used them then quit using them after a person was nearly legless. Fumbles hurt the pcs more because they are always around.
I do like how 5E does. Double the dice thrown. A Nat 1 is always a miss.