Critical Effects: Critiques Wanted

[DnDChick]

BUMP! Completely re-organized the Crit Effects page, and added some of the suggestions I got. I changed the hit location die to d20, since "everything" is done on d20, Using that die will save the DM from having to look for and grab up the rarely-used d10, thus saving a little time.

 

[Emiricol]

The chest/abdomen should be in the middle. These are the most often hit locations, and putting them in the middle of the curve would help ensure that happened. Legs, account for fully half a person's height and nearly that much of their mass, and should also be hit often.

I'd recommend a D10 hit location:

1-3 Leg
4-7 Chest/Abdomen
8-9 Arm
10 Head

The side hit for arms/legs could simply be whichever is closest to the attacker, or roll an accompanying D10 (use the % one to tell them apart) and have odds be left, evens be right.

Just a thought

 

[DnDChick]

The reason I put such a small chance to hit the legs is to reflect that in a combat, the legs usualy arent targets. In an attempt to strike the most vulnerable parts of a given body, most attacks are made in the head/chest area. Im also trying to avoid a "low-aimed" and "high aimed" hit location charts.

 

[DnDChick]

BUMP! Changed specific injury descriptions to reflect decreased chance of "instant kills."

 

[Spyritwind]

Not too bad. I too have worked a little on a hit location chart and was going to make a crit chart inspired by Rolemaster.

I'll have to think and look over it better, but you have some idea's here. I like the healing/injury thing. I think if some one had a level 4 injury and and was touched with a level two healing spell I'd reduce the wound to level two. In order for the wound to be reduced any more they'd have to be touched with a level three, or greater healing spell.

If I find my chicken scrathes I pretty much had a hit location chart with modifiers to hit. Various shots could be taken such as low shot, mid shot, high shot, or whatever. I would only bother to find out where some one was hit if it was a critical hit though. Non critical hits are pretty much superficial wounds.

From Rolemaster it seems to be bludgeoning weapons had a greater tendancy to stun opponents and cause breaks of course, slashing weapons got more bonus damage and piercing weapons caused bleeders. I hadn't got that far yet though and currently have a more simplistic, but deadlier combat system than the normal rules.

It involves the possibility of instant death and a variation of the clobbered rules.

If you roll within your critical threat range, but do not actualy get in a critical hit your opponent must mave a fort save or suffer the effects as per the Doom spell for one combat round.

If you actualy get in a critical hit it's a save, or suffer the effects as per the doom spell and reduced to a half phase action on your next action.

If you get a critical threat and your critical hit roll lands within your critical threat range again, called a Death Threat (crit threat range of the weapon for the purposes of Death Threats is only as follows: Improved Crit and Keen only add 1. Therefore a Keen Rapier in the hands of one with improved crit would have a Death Threat range of 15+), the target must make a fort save, or die. Modifiers are present for size of weapon vs size of target. That way Dragons are not likely to die from a dagger strike (unless they roll a save of "1") Even if the target makes the Death Threat save they suffer the effects as per the Doom spell for one round and lose a half phase.

I also include the death from massive damage.

This variation does not require any more dice rolls with the exception of the Fortitude Saves. It means a 10th level fighter getting hit with a critical strike from a kobold throwing a javlin could kill him, but not very likely. At the very least the fighter could be taken back by the painful strike and slowed up for a moment instead of ignoring the hit altogether like Aragorn and Legolas ignoring arrows in Moria.

One more posible addition is that when characters are reduced to half hit points they suffer a -1 to ALL D20 die rolls and when reduced to 1/4 hit points they suffer a -2.

I've looked at several wound/vitality system and although one, or two have been tempting I feel the possibility of death and deadliness can be achieved with out having two sets of hit points and the extra challenges that presents.

 

[Gothmog]

I really like the most recent versions of the critical tables you have posted. I know this probably goes against the general consensus in D&D, but I have always felt combat was a little too safe for PCs, and that the characters should probably be more worried about lasting or severe injuries. The Rolemaster tables were incredibly detailed, but were too cumbersome in play. Although I haven't tried your tables yet, I would say from just looking at them that they seem well balanced and capture the same feel as the Rolemaster tables without the complexity of rolls.

I would make one suggestion however: perhaps you should take into account the sizes of the creatures who score the critical effects. I know Rolemaster did this as well (large and super-large creature critical tables), and it could be done here with a minimum of work. Perhaps for every size category the weapon is smaller than a creature, impose a -1 to the critical roll, and for every size category larger the weapon is, give a +1 bonus. This way you won't have PC's beheading dragons with shortswords or other equally unlikely results. For example, a fighter with a longsword (size M) would suffer a -1 to his critical effect roll against an ogre (size L), but would recieve a +2 to his roll against a tiny creature, such as a pixie.

Just a suggestion. I'd like to hear what everyone thinks.

 

[DnDChick]

We could add a weapon/creature size modifier as an Optional rule. I mean...we can add as many optional rules as we want, allowing individual DMs to add as much or as little complexity as they desire!

 

[Quickbeam]

Almost there...

As promised yesterday in another thread, I've read your crit tables and explanations, along with all of the current commentary listed herein. I must say, it's one of the best systems for determining critical damage effects I've ever seen...and I've seen tons of 'em since one of the players in our group LOVES downloading every freaking crit chart he can find !!

Several comments and questions for you:
1) Gothmog makes a good point as it relates to weapon and opponent size. I realize introducing changes such as these will begin to mire the process down in additonal rolls and calculations, but if realism is what you're after *shrug*.

2) Have you fully weighed the likelihood of certain body parts being damaged instead of others? I agree that the legs are less likely to be struck than the torso, but are you willing to have a higher crit range for an area that can more easily result in serious/life-threatening injury?

3) And the big question -- despite adding realism to combat with specific damage modifiers and descriptions, are you making weapons like the rapier more deadly than the battle axe, greatsword and heavy flail? Before you answer this, please understand that I genuinely like your tables and ideas. I just wonder if such charts will sway weapon selection in an entirely different direction.

 

[Bob Aberton]

What about helmets?

To take into account helmets, how about this: The helmet must be destroyed before one can roll crit effects to the head.

Aside from that, I love it. It seems fairly streamlined to me...

 

[DnDChick]

Re: Almost there...

As promised yesterday in another thread, I've read your crit tables and explanations, along with all of the current commentary listed herein. I must say, it's one of the best systems for determining critical damage effects I've ever seen...and I've seen tons of 'em since one of the players in our group LOVES downloading every freaking crit chart he can find !!

Several comments and questions for you:
1) Gothmog makes a good point as it relates to weapon and opponent size. I realize introducing changes such as these will begin to mire the process down in additonal rolls and calculations, but if realism is what you're after *shrug*.

I havent put any serious thought to this in the last day or so. I was sorta waiting on the input of others. it seems like my crit chart has become a minor community project.

Here are my thoughts on weapon size mods:

Since larger weapons and larger monsters will on average do more damage, and the Fort Save to resist the more deadly effects is based on the damage rolled, the "weapon size modifier" seems to be already built-in.

For example, a critical from a dagger on average inflicts 4 points of damage and thus in the higher critical effects causes a Fort save of 14 to resist the more lethal effects. An Old Red Dragon bite does on average 48 points of damage on a critical and therefore requires a Fort save of 58 (!). Shrugging off the critical effect from the dagger is relatively easy even at low levels, but not many characters can take a 58 Fort save!

2) Have you fully weighed the likelihood of certain body parts being damaged instead of others? I agree that the legs are less likely to be struck than the torso, but are you willing to have a higher crit range for an area that can more easily result in serious/life-threatening injury?

Again this is already built in. If youll check the damage descriptions, youll see that crits to the head and chest have a more deadly effect on the victim.

3) And the big question -- despite adding realism to combat with specific damage modifiers and descriptions, are you making weapons like the rapier more deadly than the battle axe, greatsword and heavy flail? Before you answer this, please understand that I genuinely like your tables and ideas. I just wonder if such charts will sway weapon selection in an entirely different direction.

To be honest I havent thought about this at all. Lets get some feedback on that subject from the other contributors of this thread!