Level Up (A5E) Changes to Crit and auto-success

[Dausuul]

That is a fair point, but it seems more like an argument against having crits in general than about not changing them, because people still get that same intuition when they have a really big to-hit against someone with low ac.

Crits have nothing to do with the specifics of the monster or the combat. They exist because people get excited when the die comes up 20, and the game wants to lean into that excitement.

This is why they got rid of the confirmation roll from 3E. The confirmation roll was a logical design mechanically; it guaranteed that you didn't get a higher proportion of crits against high-AC monsters. But it overlooked the fact that crits weren't a "logical" design in the first place. Crits are about yelling and cheering when that sweet sweet 20 comes up.

If you have to do math or roll again to know if you got a crit, you lose the thrill and now it's just making the damage roll more complicated for no reason.

 

[Coroc]

I think it would be nice if Nat 20's were divorced from the critical hit effect and it also would help clear up the language around using the d20.

A natural 20 on a d20 is an auto-success regardless of if you are making a skill check, save, or attack, with the caveat that you only roll when success is possible. If you try to pick up a mountain, success is not a possibility, so you don't roll.

A crit happens whenever your attack exceeds the targets defense by at least your crit threshold, which starts at 10.
Now the champion fighter feature just reduces the threshold to 9 and 8 at the respective levels.
Similarly the Assassin rogue's auto-crit feature makes more sense now that crits are truly divorced from the die roll. "When attacking a surprised target your crit threshold is 0."

This also opens up design space for more unique weapons and features (reduce/increase crit threshold).

And i think nat 1s instead should also have an effect, if the DM desires so (i play it like that when i dm and it is part of my fun) e.g. nat 1 on a save, it the spell gos crit. Nat 1 on a climb athletics, down you fall, double damage. What kind of softening up the game do you seek - that is just boring?
As long as it is kept abstract, like it should for D&D because it does not support gorey detail other than as a narrative, then everything is fine like it is imho. Agree with your nat 20 is a skill success though, but also here a 1 is a failure no matter what,

 

[TheSword]

i think the OPs suggestion is excellent!

It would be great to have some alternative uses for Critical hits as well. Cripple, blind, terrify etc.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, thank you. This just makes to-hit math more complicated and slows the game down for no real benefit in my opinion. I also think changing crit rules would go against the goal of complete 5e compatibility. If you like this as a house rule, by all means use it in your games, but I don’t think it would be a good choice for A5e.

If the goal, as @Morrus suggested, is that a 5e character can be played in Level Up, then I don't see an inherent problem in changing how some of the rules 5e work, including critical. I think we may be limiting ourselves too much in what we can change, while remaining compatible by those standards. What rules do you think are ok to change for this game, even if we haven't yet figured out implementation?

 

[CleverNickName]

My preference: leave the nat-20/crit mechanic the way it is written. If I were to add anything to an "advanced" version of 5th Edition, I would add a critical fail mechanic...you drop your weapon, you fall prone, the spell fizzles, etc.

 

[Undrave]

I think it would be nice if Nat 20's were divorced from the critical hit effect and it also would help clear up the language around using the d20.

A natural 20 on a d20 is an auto-success regardless of if you are making a skill check, save, or attack, with the caveat that you only roll when success is possible. If you try to pick up a mountain, success is not a possibility, so you don't roll.

A crit happens whenever your attack exceeds the targets defense by at least your crit threshold, which starts at 10.
Now the champion fighter feature just reduces the threshold to 9 and 8 at the respective levels.
Similarly the Assassin rogue's auto-crit feature makes more sense now that crits are truly divorced from the die roll. "When attacking a surprised target your crit threshold is 0."

This also opens up design space for more unique weapons and features (reduce/increase crit threshold).

Augh, that seems fiddly for the sake of fiddliness and doesn't really add much. No thanks

I agree, as long as it happens to the PCs as well.

IME most are bummed out enough about taking the big damage, so I don't know if extra bad stuff would make players happy or not.

How about class features and weapon properties that add effect on crits then? The champion has all that extra crit range for basically nothing...

 

[DND_Reborn]

How about class features and weapon properties that add effect on crits then? The champion has all that extra crit range for basically nothing...

Oh, definitely! In my L12 variant I added a feature to Barbarians when they rage they can use their bonus action to attempt to knock a target prone immediately after a hit.

I think adding features like that would be nice. Rogues could perhaps apply SA damage to a second target instead of doubling up on the first, Rangers might be able to shoot through a target to hit a second with a critical bow shot, Monks could apply stun with no ki cost on a crit, or keep the cost but make the save with disadvantage, etc.

There are ALL kinds of cool things critical hits could do, either in damage or imposing conditions and so on!

 

[Umbran]

It would be great to have some alternative uses for Critical hits as well. Cripple, blind, terrify etc.

The issue with here is a basic one: We are looking for systems that are compatible with 5e. Currently, a critical gets you an extra die of damage.

Crippling, blinding, and such... are all typically much worse than one die of damage. How bad do you want critical to be?

 

[Zaukrie]

Imo, it is fun to see the excitement of a crit. Imo, the current system is boring.

I'd like the chance for the player to get to choose some effect to impose, that makes sense with the context of the battle. Some possible things....

Knock prone
Impose disadvantage on the targets next attack
Give advantage on the next attack on the target
push the target
Do more damage to the target
Slow the target
etc

 

[tetrasodium]

Imo, it is fun to see the excitement of a crit. Imo, the current system is boring.

I'd like the chance for the player to get to choose some effect to impose, that makes sense with the context of the battle. Some possible things....

Knock prone
Impose disadvantage on the targets next attack
Give advantage on the next attack on the target
push the target
Do more damage to the target
Slow the target
etc

This a thousand percent. In past editions you had weapons that were easy to be proficient with (simple weapons), weapons that were reliable with multiple damage type/high damage dice/etc, weapons that crit often, & weapons that had 3-4x crit multipliers. Alice might not really be the best at melee & her BaB meant she needed to crit to hit a lot of things, but that 1d6/x4 heavy pick was impressive. Meanwhile bob would crit on like a 9 or better so crit like every two or three attacks & it was less impressive on any individual crit

5e crits are mechanically uninteresting & statistically bland outside a lucky damage roll on top of the lucky attack roll maybe