• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

A Better Way to Do Critical Hits?

Good idea. That works for me too. What about a dagger compared to the axe though?

I'm willing to accept there's only so much you can do with a dagger compared to an axe. But you're right that the value of getting a crit with a dagger is worth a lot less relatively speaking and absolutely than getting a crit with a great axe. I think you can fix that with certain weapons that do very similar damage, but it's a lot harder with weapons that do much different damage.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I really hope that this edition is more than just an amalgam of past editions with no innovation.

I think the "natural 20" meme is so ingrained into the hobby that it's creeping out into pop culture. I highly doubt it will be going away.

This is what I"m afraid of, they seem to have a good approach to the new edition, but it really sounds like they will get caught up in all the trappings of old rules.

I read one of those seminar transcripts and one of the guys said, "the electrum piece" and I about choked. I know it was just one little thing he said, but wow, like adding complexity to the monetary system is really going to improve the game. Same with Vanican magic, they seem stuck on that, and I believe there have been plenty of polls that show the vase majority of players dislike that system (but I can't back that up with proof and I'm not saying all vanican magic sucks so don't flame me).

Take what you've learned and use that to improve, don't grab the anecdotes you personally miss and fixate on them. I love very difficult RPG's, but if I were on that design team I wouldn't be gunning for constant tpk level difficulty, cuz most people don't like that and those who do can easily add that in, just like the electrum piece.
 

I really like "Roll a 20, do max damage" as the baseline. It's simple and cool.

Basically, critical hits are a case where the actual mechanic is very fun, and that should be embraced. It's true that it makes less sense that someone who can only hit on a 20 will only get critical hits. At the same time, the less likely a player is to score any hit, the more satisfying a critical hit is. So, this is a case where making the rules more complex to solve a small simulationist problem actually makes the game less fun.

As a related aside, I like the critical feats from Pathfinder. Each lets you choose a particular option when you score a critical, such as disarming your opponent or applying a condition.
 

From a pure "what happens at the table" perspective, the cool thing is rolling a natural 20. That's the "jackpot", the high point. We just like rolling high numbers on the dice.

Confirm rules, or 10 greater than AC, or similar, while maybe more accurate/better from a balance point of view, are simply not as fun as just rolling a 20 and getting excited.

I think crits work best when they are restricted to rolling a natural 20. It's simple, easy, and the smoothest. What happens after a crit occurs can be more mathy.
 

What is that mechanic?
Torn Asunder: Critical Hits

Torn Asunder demo said:
1. If the initial attack roll is within the critical threat range, and is 5-9 higher than what was necessary to hit, a Mild Critical Effect has occurred.

2. If the initial attack roll is within the critical threat range, and is 10-14 higher than what was necessary to hit, a Moderate Critical Effect has occurred.

3. If the initial attack roll is within the critical threat range, and is 5-9 higher than what was necessary to hit, a Severe Critical Effect has occurred.

4. Determine the creature’s body profile (i.e. humanoid, four-legged beast, etc.). These should be listed with the encounter information below.

5. Look up that body profile in Torn Asunder (page reference should be included in the encounter for quick reference), and randomly determine where the critical effect landed (i.e. head, arm, leg, wing, etc.).

6. Whatever the effect is for that severity and location takes place. For example, a player rolls to attack a four-legged beast and the roll is within the critical threat range, and it is 12 over what was needed to hit. Looking up “Four-legged beast” in Torn Asunder (page 13), we see that you roll a d8 to determine where the hit landed, say Leg (C). Since it was a Moderate Critical Effect, you look on the following couple pages for Leg (Appendage) – Moderate and discover that the creature’s movement rate is reduced by 1⁄2, etc.

7. Also, feel free to remind players that there is a called shots system incorporated into this critical hits variant. Encourage them to give that a try as well.

There's mild, moderate and severe critical effects, and each one stacks.
 

DND next crit:
borat_great_success-450x337.jpg
 

Well, yes. That's why 3e had the "critical threat" for a natural 20, followed by the confirmation roll. This (plus keen weapons, the Improved Critical feat, and the like) models what you want exactly, since the master swordsman will naturally pass those confirmation rolls far more often than the novice.

Same that I had in mind... 3e critical hits are dependent on the character's skill, because (a) if the threat range is larger than 1, you can get a critical without a natural 20 if you still hit with that result, and (b) the confirmation roll is a regular roll and it confirms the critical if you just beat the AC. Would be nice to see some statistical calculation for characters with varying attack bonus...

Unfortunately, people didn't like it. The confirmation roll was officially labelled not fun and exiled to the outer darkness. (Yes, that's hyperbole.)

Well, at least we did like it... there was some oddly entertaining tension in the moment where everyone gathered up to see if the confirmation roll succeeded or not. A bit like a free shot or penalty shot in sport... :cool:
 




Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top