Critical Adjustment Stacking

[fuzzy]

3.5 screwed over wide threat-range weapon users mathmatically by not letting keen and Improved Critical stack. See this argument, courtesy of Sean K Reynolds. LEW should probably fix that and let them stack. Sorry about not having my own argument for it. Judges?

 

[GnomeWorks]

My initial thought is no. That rule was changed for a reason.

However, I will go over the argument in more detail when I get the chance and explain my stance, be it the same or changed.

 

[fuzzy]

The rule was changed because they thought you could get too wide a range for vorpal. Now that vorpal requires a natural 20, the issue is gone. The flavor also doesn't make sense. Improved Critical and sneak attacks arre both hitting vital areas through skill. Keen makes your weapon better able to do so. Why should one form of the same type of training stack with superior weapons but not the other. It is also, I believe, the only instance of a feat and a weapon property not stacking.

 

[Rystil Arden]

My initial thought is no. That rule was changed for a reason.

However, I will go over the argument in more detail when I get the chance and explain my stance, be it the same or changed.

The rule was changed for a reason, but it was a really dumb reason. It was changed because people were whining about a combo involving several other things in 3.0 that they got rid of, despite tons more playtest data and math showing that it makes sense to allow it. Two stacking crit-enhancers available is exactly where it remains fair, mathematically. Just don't let in a third, or a fourth.

 

[Knight Otu]

The fewer actual changes we make to the rules, the better. Any actual rules change makes it harder to jump in. Personally, I feel there are two types of rules that can be changed:

1) They don't work, or at least don't play nicely, in the framework of Living Enworld. That's, for example, the source of the much-hated Craft Points.
2) They don't work, period. Gamebreaking stuff. Epic Spells, I'm looking at you guys, as far away as you may seem.

I don't feel that non-stacking criticals will break the game any more than stacking ones, despite the hyperbole SKR uses. With the choice between two rules that work, I think using the default rule is better overall.

 

[Manzanita]

Knight Otu has a good point. It will be years before anyone gets the improved critical feat, and who knows when Keen weapons will appear. This proposal is a bit premature. I too, would prefer not to have a gaggle of house rules.

 

[GnomeWorks]

I concur with KO. This rule has little impact on LEW at the moment, and the default rule isn't broken. In addition, I don't think that Sean's explanation of why the rapier and falcion are inferior weapons is entirely accurate, as he completely discounts the weapons' other qualities (a falcion is one-handed, while a greatsword is two-handed; a rapier is light).

With that in mind, I give this proposal a No.

 

[Krug]

The fewer actual changes we make to the rules, the better. Any actual rules change makes it harder to jump in. Personally, I feel there are two types of rules that can be changed:

1) They don't work, or at least don't play nicely, in the framework of Living Enworld. That's, for example, the source of the much-hated Craft Points.
2) They don't work, period. Gamebreaking stuff. Epic Spells, I'm looking at you guys, as far away as you may seem.

I don't feel that non-stacking criticals will break the game any more than stacking ones, despite the hyperbole SKR uses. With the choice between two rules that work, I think using the default rule is better overall.

I kinda agree. If I want to DM, I don't want to have to wade through this and that rule and have it become a point of contention during play. Even right now, there's a lot of stuff to read through. Frankly, I think we should keep as close to SRD as possible.

 

[Knight Otu]

I'll add an official No of mine.

 

[Patlin]

No. I agree with Knight Otu.