Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 4998188" data-attributes="member: 59082">In the past I've felt that Critical Hits as written are rather under-powered; in my own gaming history one of the exciting moments of a game is the roll of a natural 20--just applying max damage seems just a tad anticlimactic.In the campaign I've been running we've used the following house rule:When a player rolls a Natural 20, maximum damage results as usual, but they can roll a second attack, with the effect depending upon the result:     Miss: No further effect     Hit: Maximum damage plus a second damage roll.     Natural 20: Twice maximum damage and a third d20 roll. Three Natural 20s in a row results in triple maximum damage, four in quadruple, etc. Any other bonuses stack on top of this but are not multiplied with the maximum damage (e.g. the effects of a vicious weapon). As our campaign has gotten to 5th level and I've read deeper into the rules I'm starting to think that this has too much of a "pick-up-sticks" effect; that is, when you tug on one rule you inadvertently impact numerous others. In this case, it is the numerous special, magical, and generally higher level effects that improve criticals, which this house rule detracts.So I'm thinking of trashing it, but wondering if I should compensate with a middle ground. What do you do? Do you use the RAW and is it OK? Or do you have your own house crit rule?A couple options I've thought of:*Upon a critical hit the player has the option to spend an Action Point and double damage.*Upon a critical hit the player rolls another d20; if he or she rolls a second natural 20 double max damage is scored; a third d20 roll occurs.The first seems quite powerful but nicely dramatic, and a pleasant use of an Action Point. The second is a variation on my original rule but with decreased chance of further damage, to the point of almost being "why bother" (a 1 in 400 chance).Thoughts?</blockquote>

Verification