D&D (2024) DM's no longer getting crits on PC's

[SkidAce]

A lot of us are. I'm just get off my lawn bitter that I've been DMing since 1983 and for the first time ever, I decided to use Vecna as the string puller and ultimate BBEG and then Stranger Things happened.

I hear yah, so many things I have planned or developed independently over the years only to hear new players say "Oh you git that idea from..."

No, no I did not.

/raises glass to @Maxperson

 

[Greg K]

Yeah this why the new D&D of the last few years and moving forward just isn't for me. I don't agree with the broad trends that WotC care about.

The same for me. This is why, while I am keeping an eye on the playtest, I am also looking into other systems such as the upcoming revised Fantasy Age revised core book, Fantasy Craft, Modiphius Conan.

 

[Branduil]

I don't really like this change. I'm certainly not a hardcore "PCs and monsters must use the same rules!!!" person, in fact I'd prefer to go back to 4e-style monsters, but I think completely eliminating crits will make things feel too safe and predictable. If the problem is monster attacks being too deadly when critting, I think the better solution is to just limit the crit damage. Something like

Hit: 8d6 + 12 damage (Crit: +4d6)

would work fine.

 

[James Gasik]

Going back to 4e crits, where you just deal maximum damage, might be a better approach. What I'm curious about is why they seem to want to limit player critical damage to just weapon dice in the first place.

 

[Maxperson]

Going back to 4e crits, where you just deal maximum damage, might be a better approach. What I'm curious about is why they seem to want to limit player critical damage to just weapon dice in the first place.

They may be planning on toning down monster hit points to stop the whole, "Monsters are just big bags of hit points" complaints.

 

[James Gasik]

They may be planning on toning down monster hit points to stop the whole, "Monsters are just big bags of hit points" complaints.

I wonder by how much though. I mean, you can't really design around "well, they might have a Rogue and she might get a critical hit", can you?

 

[Reynard]

They may be planning on toning down monster hit points to stop the whole, "Monsters are just big bags of hit points" complaints.

I don't think that solves the problem. Then monsters are "just medium sized bags of hit points." If you don't give monsters interesting things to do -- either by adding monster abilities, or by widening the selection of meaningful maneuvers and tactics in general -- they just suck for a shorter period of time. Especially if the goal is to reduce combats in favor of story, the combats that are there need to be interesting, dynamic, and tense.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Even with crits, most monsters are currently just bags of hit points (notwithstanding the ability of DMs to do something interesting with them, i.e. “The Monsters Know What They Are Doing.”)

And, let’s face it, in many/most fights the monsters don’t crit. I suppose the fear of crits is worth something, but I’d rather have them do something interesting more reliably.

If that could be mitigated with new abilities I’d much rather have active abilities than a 5% chance of a crit.

 

[Azzy]

Ambivalent. Waiting to see how the compensate monsters before I form a real opinion.

 

[Maxperson]

I wonder by how much though. I mean, you can't really design around "well, they might have a Rogue and she might get a critical hit", can you?

I'm sure they could figure out the average drop in damage. They'll probably use internal polling, D&D Beyond and other sources to figure out how many rogues, paladins, etc. are in parties on average and drop hit points a little to compensate. Then they could drop HP some more, and either up the damage output of monsters or add in more interesting abilities to compensate as a danger to the PCs. And if necessary, rules for adding in extra monsters to increase the challenge.