Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Amaroq" data-source="post: 5133903" data-attributes="member: 15470">Here's the downside to increased monster crits. The last two long-running characters I've played have been AC extremists, a 3.5e paladin, and a 4e fighter. They both got to the point where we'd frequently engage monsters that needed an 18 or better to hit me, and with powers that boost AC, etc, I've memorably fought an opponent that hit only a 20 - but as that was his target to hit my AC, he basically missed me or critted me.The math on that may be right, but it doesn't feel right to the targeted player: you actually do want to be able to take a number of normal wounds, and have crits remain "rare" ... I mean, yes they're only happening one time in 20, but if one in three hits is a crit, it feels like one is getting picked on.Note also that increasing monster criticals is going to essentially "punish" the defender for getting out there and taking more attacks than his compatriots; a well-played defender gets attacked at least twice as much, possibly three or four times as much as his "back line" .. so increased monster-crits may be something which feels "right" to the back-line players, but turns out sucky for the defenders.The solution I came up with was a "confirm a crit" mechanic: roll another d20, and if the result is:- Critical: DM adjudicates, tells a story- A hit: As current rules: maximum damage plus die rolls and critical effects- A miss: Normal damage plus die rolls and critical effectsThis served to minimize the "hey the defender always gets critted" feeling very well ... but it also reduced monster damage output quite a bit.I compensated by doing exactly what you're describing: adding critical dice and/or effects for certain "signature" monsters. I didn't want minions or rank-and-file bad guys to really tag the party, but I started adding lines to most of my main monsters' powers specifying crit dice and/or effects.A run-of-the-mill skirmisher might not be adjusted.That brute with the giant axe might have his power read:Giant Axe - Basic Melee Attack - Standard Action - At-Will+14 vs AC; 1d10 + 7 damage.Critical: +1d12 damage; target is pushed 1 square and knocked prone.We've been playing this for a couple years, and most of my players love it. They still get to do most of their cool critical stuff, and maximizing the weapon dice tends to be less important than their critical effects. Monsters don't crit the defenders too often. And when that big brute with the axe crits, the players remember it and treat him with a healthy respect!(One of my players dislikes this mechanic: he says that when he rolls a 20, and then follows up with a "miss", he's more disappointed with the miss than excited at the crit. Basically, its a psychological thing: he wants to feel that excitement when he rolls a 20, not on the follow-up. We've talked through the math, and his conclusion was "Yeah, I agree, its better for the PC's this way, but its like eating my vegetables: I know its good for me, but I still don't like it.")</blockquote>

Verification