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

[The Little Raven]

Everything from the spell system

Good riddance!

to criticals

Confirmations, actually.

to sneak attacks

Sneak attack isn't the problem. The fact that it's a good part of what the rogue is given, yet isn't useful against many of the creatures you'll face, leaving the rogue to be little help during those fights.

Again, here's an issue of people having a legitimate problem with a particular aspect, and you just handwave it all as "BAD!" for your argument.

to halflings

Uh, what? 4e Halflings are just 3e Halflings given their own terrain. Unless you're talking about hobbit-style halflings, in which case, maybe you should go back to 2000 and argue their case then, instead of waiting 8 years and blaming 4e for the changes.

and gnomes

It's been demonstrated on this board that gnomes are the least popular race, along with half-orcs. Why put something in a book for legacy issues if barely anyone plays it, when you can replace it with character types people play more often (tieflings, and dragon-dudes of some kind)? Nah, that would be paying too much attention to how people play the game, rather than adhering to tradition because it's blasphemy to change things established in the 1970s.

and the gods

An adventure game doesn't need gods of everything, just appropriate gods for the game. Sure, if you want to be a worldbuilder and have a non-adventurer-favored god of agriculture, that's fine, just like you can be super detailed on all the different currencies available in your setting. Doesn't mean the core game should do that, especially when trying to attract new players.

and elementals

I AM DUDE OF FIRE LIVING ON PLANE OF INFINITE FIRE WHOSE ONLY PURPOSE IS TO BE SUMMONED INTO DUNGEONS! AAARGH! Yeah... that was real fun... inspired, too. However can we live without elemental beings that have no motivation whatsoever, aside from being summoned and killing ?

and darkvision

This change is explained perfectly well in R&C.

and classes

Yeah, the whole concept of "system mastery" screwed up classes, because anyone with a degree of system mastery recognizes that bard and monk are substandard choices compared to other classes.

and saving throws

Noone said saving throws were unfun. We said they were wonky because in all cases where you have attacks, the attacker rolls... except spells. 3e claimed to be going for consistent mechanics, but it only went half-way because of sacred cows.

Ever think that so many alternate systems were created by companies in 3.X because of lack of satisfaction with some core systems? Gee... that would... make sense.

What was fun about v3.5?

Being able to effectively change the system to make it more fun.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Given that "max damage on a natural 20, except when you need a 20 to hit" has been my house rule for crits since 3.0, I like the change.

 

[Mirtek]

It is, it does, and it's not. What I'm confused by is why you think these are "bad" reasons- are you claiming that one of these is fun in 3e?

Yes, they made most fun of all. Not at the moment, but just prior (when you where scared whether it would happen or your char would get lucky) and afterwards whenever you remember it.

I mean:

Demons -> charge, slay take their stats
Dragons -> charge, slay take their stats
Giants -> charge, slay take their stuff
non-draining undead -> charge, slay take their stuff

Really, not scary at all

draining undead and poisonous animals-> players wetting their pants


Give me a temple of the evil wargod. Yawn, enter kill anyone and take their stuffs.
Give me a temple of the evil deathgod. Yawn, enter kill everyone and take their stuff.

BUT give me the temple of the evil plage god and it suddenly all becomes a "You first! Me? NOOO! YOU first! Forget it"

Give me the biggest monster doing insane damage -> charge kill it and take it's stuff
Give me a monster that doesn't really threatens death but drains energy/abilities and you scare the out of me.

I soon forgett my insane crit on the BBEG of the campaign but I damn sure remember every time I missed because of too much PA penatly or when my char had to be carried out of the dungeon by his friends because he had too much strength drained to walk on his own.

I never had the impression that anyone was scared because his char could be rend in two, being eaten in one piece or crushed to slush. But anyone had an irrational panic about having his char walk out perfectly fine with 100 hp but with a negative level or being infected with a ability score draining disease.

Same with missed confirmations roll. Maybe I have a too pesimistic world view, but all my fondest D&D memories are of fricking failures while all our victories are forgotten as soon as they happen. I still grin when remembering our cleric of Kord using his strength domain power and some other smite to really give it to the BBEG with his greatsword, shouting "FOR KORD" as he throws his dice and rolls a natural 1! No problem, Kord won't allow this *uses luck domain power for reroll* shouting "FOR KORD" as he throws his dice and rolls ..... a second natural 1!

Was it fun at this very momemt? Maybe not. Was it in retrospectively one of our greates D&D moments? Sure it was! And the player of the Kord cleric agrees wholehearthly, in fact, this anecdote is the one you will most likely hear if you ask him anything about his old Kord cleric character. And he too would have quite a few victories to brag about, but he always tells this one story

Take out the frustration and you take out the fun! A healthy dose of frustration is the soil from which the greatest fun grows!

 

[Wolfspider]

Eh, I think I'm done with the 4e forums now.

I think I'll be a much happier person for it.

Have fun everyone!

 

[Benimoto]

Wrong. You don't lose anything. The natural 20 in 3.x is not a critical hit. It merely offers the chance to score one. Apparently, the real issue is one of player entitement rwith you projecting what you believe a natural 20 should be rather than accepting the actual critical hit rules for what they were designed to represent.

It definitely seems to me that there is an issue with what players expect from a natural 20, but I don't think it has anything to do with entitlement.

I think the confirmation roll does introduce a psychological problem in that it dangles a reward in front of the player, only to have that reward somewhat randomly taken away. I can definitely see how, from a fun standpoint, removing the confirmation roll would improve things. At the same time, I can see how reducing the impact of each critical would be needed to balance that out.

From a pure design perspective, I liked the confirmation roll, and how it kept the to-hit bonus and the opponent's AC in the equation. I'll miss that in the new system, but probably not enough to switch back.

 

[Khaim]

Take out the frustration and you take out the fun! A healthy dose of frustration is the soil from which the greatest fun grows!

We're obviously not going to have any sort of rational argument here. Let's move on.

 

[Mirtek]

We're obviously not going to have any sort of rational argument here. Let's move on.

So anyone who disagrees is irrational?

 

[JohnSnow]

Eh, I think I'm done with the 4e forums now.

I think I'll be a much happier person for it.

Have fun everyone!

Why do people feel the need to state this?

If you're going to go, just go. Stop being so melodramatic about it.

Now, to keep this on-topic...

I think the confirmation roll does introduce a psychological problem in that it dangles a reward in front of the player, only to have that reward somewhat randomly taken away. I can definitely see how, from a fun standpoint, removing the confirmation roll would improve things. At the same time, I can see how reducing the impact of each critical would be needed to balance that out.

From a pure design perspective, I liked the confirmation roll, and how it kept the to-hit bonus and the opponent's AC in the equation. I'll miss that in the new system, but probably not enough to switch back.

I think this might be fixed based on the wider range for attack rolls. If you never have to worry about the situation where you can "only hit on a 20," then your to-hit bonus and your opponent's AC remain in the equation.

There's a nice benefit to crits, but, absent a character with better abilities, it's only max damage. So, let's consider a theory:

Bob is a farmer with a longbow and a 14 strength. Assuming things stay the same as in 3e, his damage is 1d8 +2 + 1d6 (crit bonus), or 11-16 points on a crit. That assumes that a bow might grant some extra damage on a crit.

Bard the Bowman is a legendary archer. Let's say he's a Level 12 ranger dedicated to archery. He has feats that boost his damage, and shoots a dragon, and spends an action point to auto-crit. Let's make some wild speculation:

Critical Hit: 3d8 (level) + 6 (bonuses) + 3d8 (power) + 3d6 (crit) = 57 - 72 pts of damage. That could be enough to bloody a dragon with one shot.

If any of the powers add dice of damage, the max on a crit might apply to 5 or 6 dice, rather than one.

That could be huge.

 

[DonTadow]

The confirmation roll was always a problem that i hadn't played with since 3.0, we always hosue ruled the confirmation away. In advanced game manual skip williams does a great writeup on those clinging to the math to implement threatless crits in their game. But this "maximum damage crap" is asanine.

When they first started talking about 4th edition they were suppose to leave in some legendary things i assumed. Taking the potency of seeing a 20 away demeans the game. It demeans us all. The more I hear about 4e the more I swing from initially implementing it with house rules to implementing 4e elements into my 3.5 games.

 

[Lanefan]

I for one have no problem at all with a farmer occasionally being able to out-damage a high-level warrior on a lucky strike. The little guy should *always* have a chance of hurting or even killing the big guy, and if they manage to take that out of the game the fun level - for me - will drop dramatically.

Reeling in the damage and h.p. numbers such that an ordinary dagger or crossbow remains useful at mid-high levels would help a lot. And (to get vaguely back on topic) if this means a critical hit is more likely gonna kill someone, so be it.

As for the notion of "frustration" now being remembered as fun later: absolutely true. The best-remembered encounters and most-oft-told stories down the years often seem to come from situations where the PCs didn't have everything going their way...sometimes, didn't have *anything* going their way...yet they got away with it even if it cost them some levels or party members to do so. That sort of thing is the heart and soul of the game!

Lanefan