Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Harr" data-source="post: 4566242" data-attributes="member: 47190">About the max damage: My reason for adopting it is also the increase in speed. You are not only saving yourself the time to actually roll damage, you are saving yourself all those rounds that go &quot;Woo I hit with a 19! roll damage... 1.&quot; Better luck next round.&nbsp; In theory it should half the time a monster or a player takes to go down even before counting the time saved in rolling and adding up dice.And in my experience this is a change that not only a fast-play version but also the regular version of 4e needs. Consider mshea's example of a dwarven fighter level 15 with high-crit - doing 84 damage on a critical hit.Level 15 brute? Wouldn't even get down to *bloodied* with 84 damage. Soldier or skirmisher would get bloodied, but barely. This is with a fighter character having high crit hitting a critical, ie what will probably be one of the highest-damage hits in the entire combat. It does have the potential to change the tide of the battle, but only just barely - and that is what a critical should do in my opinion.Also critical hits in combat are scored 5% of the time (and some of that 5% is bound to fall to skill checks or such, so less)... I don't think it could have that much of an impact, I think you could even make a rule that has critical hits be auto-kills and it wouldn't really change the battles that much overall (except for making players feel totally awesome when they score one).Anyway, I realize you guys have different goals from mine, since I'm actually trying to change the actual regular game, but I also have a game this weekend and will write about what happens. Could be I'm totally wrong here <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Harr, post: 4566242, member: 47190"] About the max damage: My reason for adopting it is also the increase in speed. You are not only saving yourself the time to actually roll damage, you are saving yourself all those rounds that go "Woo I hit with a 19! roll damage... 1." Better luck next round. In theory it should half the time a monster or a player takes to go down even before counting the time saved in rolling and adding up dice. And in my experience this is a change that not only a fast-play version but also the regular version of 4e needs. Consider mshea's example of a dwarven fighter level 15 with high-crit - doing 84 damage on a critical hit. Level 15 brute? Wouldn't even get down to *bloodied* with 84 damage. Soldier or skirmisher would get bloodied, but barely. This is with a fighter character having high crit hitting a critical, ie what will probably be one of the highest-damage hits in the entire combat. It does have the potential to change the tide of the battle, but only just barely - and that is what a critical should do in my opinion. Also critical hits in combat are scored 5% of the time (and some of that 5% is bound to fall to skill checks or such, so less)... I don't think it could have that much of an impact, I think you could even make a rule that has critical hits be auto-kills and it wouldn't really change the battles that much overall (except for making players feel totally awesome when they score one). Anyway, I realize you guys have different goals from mine, since I'm actually trying to change the actual regular game, but I also have a game this weekend and will write about what happens. Could be I'm totally wrong here :) [/QUOTE]

Verification