Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gruns" data-source="post: 4581163" data-attributes="member: 10312">Let it be.I don't see why this is something that needs changed at all. Once you get a magic weapon with some plusses to it, and possibly more special crit effects, crits are still pretty nice. And just because it's max damage as opposed to double damage, the crits in 4E still come close to the damage of crits 3.5 since there is no confirmation roll.Sample 3.5 crit: Basic +2 Longsword with 18 Strength. We're just going to have to figure that you hit about 50% of the time in 3.5, even though we know this isn't as true as it is in 4E.Take 4 samples of the 3.5 crit...1) Confirmed max damage= 28 damage.2) Confirmed min damage= 14 damage.3) Unconfirmed max damage= 14 damage.4) Unconfirmed min damage= 7 damage.So the average "Natural 20" from 3.5 here is about 63/4 or 15.75 damage.And a sample crit from 4E with a basic 1[W] power, 18 Str and plain vanilla +2 Longsword.1) Max damage= 26 damage2) Min damage= 16 damageThe average here is actually 42/2 or 21 damage.As you move on to higher level magic items with more plusses, and especially when you move onto powers with more [W]'s, the effects get even better in 4E's favor.What does this all mean? Not much since overall the damage dealt in 4E seems to be greater. I suppose if you wanted to, you could do a comparison of how much better a crit is when compared to a regular hit from the same edition, but there are far too many variables to take into account for the 4E side of the equation. In the end, I say just leave the crits as they are. The lack of confirmation roll adds quite a bit to their power.Later!Gruns</blockquote>

Verification