Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
clunky crit and cover
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="evilbob" data-source="post: 6330104" data-attributes="member: 9789"><p>I hear you; I understand these arguments. In my opinion, "players like rolling dice" is just not nearly as important as "rules should be simple" and "resolving play should take the least amount of time possible." If they really wanted players to roll more dice, then saves against spells should be reversed: players should roll attacks vs. monsters' static defenses, instead of the other way around. That doesn't seem to be their primary goal.</p><p></p><p>As for making it possible to exceed max damage, it also means you can crit and get a total of 2. That's such a negative outcome that I would happily trade a guaranteed good success for the chance at an even better success to avoid the bad success. A crit should - in my opinion - always be rewarded. Even though "max damage" is a fraction smaller on average than "roll twice," randomness tends to work against players (as opposed to non-random results). Static crits are more rewarding.</p><p></p><p>As for the cover arguments, I still think that's something that belongs more in a tactical module. If you're looking for realism, there are too many counter-examples to list. <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 :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>I guess it comes down to priorities, and what I am interpreting as the core goals of 5.0. "Speed of play" and "easy to remember" seem to be the main principles and are reflected everywhere else; it just seems curious that these two rules break that system and are more clunky for seemingly little payoff. That's why they stand out so much to me.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="evilbob, post: 6330104, member: 9789"] I hear you; I understand these arguments. In my opinion, "players like rolling dice" is just not nearly as important as "rules should be simple" and "resolving play should take the least amount of time possible." If they really wanted players to roll more dice, then saves against spells should be reversed: players should roll attacks vs. monsters' static defenses, instead of the other way around. That doesn't seem to be their primary goal. As for making it possible to exceed max damage, it also means you can crit and get a total of 2. That's such a negative outcome that I would happily trade a guaranteed good success for the chance at an even better success to avoid the bad success. A crit should - in my opinion - always be rewarded. Even though "max damage" is a fraction smaller on average than "roll twice," randomness tends to work against players (as opposed to non-random results). Static crits are more rewarding. As for the cover arguments, I still think that's something that belongs more in a tactical module. If you're looking for realism, there are too many counter-examples to list. :) I guess it comes down to priorities, and what I am interpreting as the core goals of 5.0. "Speed of play" and "easy to remember" seem to be the main principles and are reflected everywhere else; it just seems curious that these two rules break that system and are more clunky for seemingly little payoff. That's why they stand out so much to me. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
clunky crit and cover
Top