D&D 5E Critical Hits Appears to be Next in D&D Archive

[Stalker0]

On a natural 20, the attacker automatically hits, and gets a damage bonus equal to the amount by which they exceeded the required score to hit, or equal to half the maximum of their damage dice, whichever is lower.

Variants like this require two things:

1) That the player knows the AC of the thing he's fighting, and that is often not the case. Further, even if the dm allows it, he then has to tell you the AC of the creature, and you have to remember it. Sounds so simple, but oh how often players and dms alike forget these simple numbers.

2) You then have to calculate the difference between your attack roll and damage roll, then mentally add that to your damage for that roll. Again, sounds so simple, most people can do it. But some people still have problems with it.

This thread reminds me so much of the early Star Wars SAGA threads. In that system, 20's also crit and even provide x2 damage!! The exact same arguments came up. Here are the counterpoints to some of the arguments I've seen.

1) People crit at the same rate even if one has a +20 to attack and the other a -20!! True, but they likely don't do the same damage. If we take the assumption that powers add extra dice in the mix (which is a reasonable assumption though certainly not a proven one), then higher level character do bigger damage on crits. Further, let's consider that at 10th level, 3 damage isn't much. So if a mook hits you for 3 more damage, as far as flavor goes, do you really notice? However, if another 10th level guy hits you for +20 damage, you will notice.

Finally, this rule actually helps make mooks a bit scarier. One of the "issues" with dnd (not for everyone, but at least a significant portion) is that past a certain point mooks become irrelevant. They can't hit, don't do any damage, and die too quickly to be a threat. With the crit rule, mooks get a little extra damage 5% of the time, whereas in the current system that's .25% of the time. That combined with a few other rules we haven't seen will likely make mooks more threatening.

2) Crits don't seem very exciting now!

At first glance, I agree with this. +3 damage or so isn't anything to write home about. However, we've only see the tip of the iceberg. If magic weapons give bigger crits, if powers get crit bonuses, if certain weapons get cooler with crits, then suddenly its a brand new ballgame.

3) Crits aren't special anymore, they happen too often.

Something I've never considered before is how often do crits normally happen in 3e? I've never really thought about it, my initial feeling is that most crits chances I've seen have turned out to be failed confirmations, but you can't really go with the gut because people have skewed memories.

However, 4e will also have fewer attacks judging by what I've seen so far. A 6th level fighter gets 2 attacks per round, so that's 2 crit possibilities every time (though his second attack has far less chance to confirm). A 6th level 4e fighter will likely have one attack. So in some ways this helps balance the math. I'm confident we will see crits more often in 4e, but perhaps not to the level some people have feared.

 

[Sir Brennen]

3) Crits aren't special anymore, they happen too often.

Something I've never considered before is how often do crits normally happen in 3e? I've never really thought about it, my initial feeling is that most crits chances I've seen have turned out to be failed confirmations, but you can't really go with the gut because people have skewed memories.

Not to mention, half the time a crit is confirmed, the rolled damage dice will only exceed a normal max damage hit 1/2 the time (for a x2 multiplier). So, unless there's alot of static bonuses which get doubled (normally only true for the fighter), a confirmed crit often isn't anything to write home about either.

 

[Spatula]

Except when you lose, which makes it a load of BS. Ever seen UHF? It's like the scene on that gameshow, a huge, exciting build-up to... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! YAY!

An automatic hit is absolutely nothing?

Sorry that it's not as exciting as your preferred awesome system

I don't have a preferred system, sorry. I already posted in this thread that I think no confirmation roll, when combined with weakened critical damage, sounds like it will be fairly balanced. And I explained a bit how in 3.5 criticals can get out of hand at higher levels.

Yes, because stating that 4e has abilities that play off of successful critical hits certainly hasn't been mentioned in any of the articles.

Ok, so clerics can apparently heal random party members when they get a critical hit. Or they could back in August, anyway. That's certainly something interesting, but it is odd that the article on critical hits doesn't mention anything about class powers that work off crits.

And speculating that there may be feats that permanently modify a capability like critical hits (maybe making the range 19-20, or adding an additional crit die with certain weapons) like previous 3rd Edition feats is just so incredibly off-base.

That article says absolutely nothing about crit-related feats.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Ok, so clerics can apparently heal random party members when they get a critical hit. Or they could back in August, anyway. That's certainly something interesting, but it is odd that the article on critical hits doesn't mention anything about class powers that work off crits.

You must have missed this line in the article:

"In addition, some powers and magic items have extra effects on a hit."

It's brief, but it's there.

 

[HeinorNY]

The way crits were presented was not all that exciting to me. It's simpler, it's faster and easier to resolve, but only that.
When I think about rolling a critical hit in 4E, considering the very few things we know yet, i don't get all that excited, mainly because we can just get the same result with a regular hit anyway. If my character wields a shortsword, 1 of 6 regular hits will be a ''pseudo-crit".

Sure, weapons at higher levels may deal more damage dice.
There may be feats or powers that let you add more damage dice, or crit on a 19, or 18, or heal an ally, or activate a special power or magical item.
I can think about many options that make the critical hit to be more exciting, more interesting and worthwhile.
But we don't know them yet, we don't know the possibilities. All we can do is to have an opinion about what they shows us. That was not a very thrilling article in my opinion, but I can wait.

I believe the current critical hit rule is just the 'bottom line' of crits, it is that small difference that every character has the chance to acomplish in combat. It has to start small because anyone can do it, but will become greater, more powerful and dangerous as your character becomes more powerful, with the right class, feats and powers.

But until we know more, 4E critical hits are faster, simpler and easier to resolve, maybe more balanced, and just that.

 

[Sir Brennen]

But until we know more, 4E critical hits are faster, simpler and easier to resolve, maybe more balanced, and just that.

No, we do know from the article:

"Magic weapons (and implements for magical attacks) add extra damage on crits. So your +1 frost warhammer deals an extra 1d6 damage on a critical hit (so your crit's now up to 14+1d6 damage in the example above). [...]

Crits can be improved in a couple of other ways. Weapons can have the high crit property, giving extra dice on a crit. [...]

In addition, some powers and magic items have extra effects on a hit."​

We just don't know many specifics about any of these modifiers to crits, and we do actually know the specifics of how the +1 frost warhammer adds to a crit.

 

[Hjorimir]

Finally, this rule actually helps make mooks a bit scarier. One of the "issues" with dnd (not for everyone, but at least a significant portion) is that past a certain point mooks become irrelevant. They can't hit, don't do any damage, and die too quickly to be a threat. With the crit rule, mooks get a little extra damage 5% of the time, whereas in the current system that's .25% of the time. That combined with a few other rules we haven't seen will likely make mooks more threatening.

That was my thinking as well. Overall, I'm a big fan of these changes. I miss the old days where a player rolled a twenty and was instantly happy for it.

One of the things I have been hoping from 4E was an overall reduction in the spike damage. I really think that AD&D had a pretty good balance on it. The fighter types did the most melee damage, but without things like power attack and two-handed weapon bonuses, the damage from other character (e.g. thieves) were not so overshadowed to feel irrelevant in comparison. When I see these flatter critical totals I get the feeling that 4E will deliver on that hope.

 

[Mirtek]

Not to mention, half the time a crit is confirmed, the rolled damage dice will only exceed a normal max damage hit 1/2 the time (for a x2 multiplier). So, unless there's alot of static bonuses which get doubled (normally only true for the fighter), a confirmed crit often isn't anything to write home about either.

The fighter, or barbarian or fighter or duskblade or paladin or ....

That brings up an interesting point: How will 4e handle the relation between weapn dice damage and static damage bonuses?

In 3.x the weapon damage dice became irrelevant at some point. If I am doing 1d8 + 24 In really don't care that the crit makes my average 4.5 point longsword damage into 8 points of longsword damage. The extra 3.5 damage is simply eclipsed by my static bonusdamage anyway

 

[BryonD]

Sorry that it's not as exciting as your preferred awesome system of double rolling to get an additional 3 damage from your short sword on a crit, but not all of us are in love with pointless rolls.

Wow, you have missed out on a hell of a lot if that is how you found the old crit system to be.



On the general topic:

With the data available I see this change as a slight negative. I do agree with their point about wild spikes in damage. So nerfing crits is a reasonable idea. And if you are going to nerf them. then making them easier to come by is ok. So, whatever, I can accept this.

But I've played in older games with nat 20 = crit rules and they didn't hold a candle to the excitement of 3X crits. I mean, it was cool and all. But 3X took it to a whole new level. In the old system you'd get excitement with a 20 came up. No doubt. And 4 out 5 3X crits were the same. But frequently when that crit came through you'd get alot more of the "Hell Yeah!!!" effect because it was both harder to get and you expected it to really pay off.
I also like that it is easier to crit something you hit on a 5 than something you hit on a 15.

I do loath the "OMG, I gotta roll an extra die, I'm so overwhelmed with the work and mental strain" mentality. But, at least it isn't doing much harm in the case.

 

[Nikosandros]

The fighter, or barbarian or fighter or duskblade or paladin or ....

That brings up an interesting point: How will 4e handle the relation between weapn dice damage and static damage bonuses?

I mentioned it in a previous post.

As others have argued, it's quite possible that damages will be more additional dice of damage and less static bonuses.