D&D (2024) DM's no longer getting crits on PC's

[shadowoflameth]

The expressed reason to do this is that monsters critical hitting can kill low level characters outright and that this is not fun. Absolutely true, but nerfing monsters is not fun either. Nerfing the paladin or rogue is very not fun. Better to address this with a look at the death system, or by bringing back minons. Minions did static damage in a prior edition and so did not roll crit dice. The critical change is the only item in the playtest material that I outright hated.

 

[payn]

Conversely, they could be setting up different weapons having different crit values, but wanted to test a more generic version first. What if the next iteration of the rule stated "When you crit with a weapon or unarmed strike that you are proficient with, in addition to the normal weapon damage, you also roll the Crit dice of that weapon and add it to the total." And then you get things like

Dagger (crit 1d6)
Club (crit 2d4)
Short Bow (crit 1d4)
Long Bow (crit 1d6)
Rapier (crit 1d4)
Long Sword (crit 1d8)
Great Sword (crit 2d6)
Great Axe (Crit 3d6))

This would further differentiate weapons, is easily marked on a character sheet, and could even be included with monster weapon attacks

Add on to that monsters recharging on a crit (which also encourages DMs to always use recharge abilities first), and suddenly you've got a much more interesting crit system than before, while not being too complicated. Players just need to look at their weapon damage to see what they roll when they crit. DMs just need to mark the recharge for their monster)

Why ever use a short bow or rapier tho?

 

[Nikosandros]

Why ever use a short bow or rapier tho?

Personally, I dislike the rapier as it is now. With 1d8 damage and finesse it contributes to the imbalance of dexterity vs strength.

 

[payn]

Personally, I dislike the rapier as it is now. With 1d8 damage and finesse it contributes to the imbalance of dexterity vs strength.

Sure, I was speaking to OB1's crit system, but this highlights some of the weapon issues of the past. Differentiation often lends itself to optimal and suboptimal choices.

 

[Art Waring]

The expressed reason to do this is that monsters critical hitting can kill low level characters outright and that this is not fun. Absolutely true, but nerfing monsters is not fun either.

Every GM I know, including myself, almost always fudges crits against 1st level characters made by monsters. It was kind of an unspoken rule that you didn't want your character to die right out of the gate.

I don't like fudging at all, but in this case it is useful.

I get their reasoning, but cutting out crits for monsters across the board leaves out exiting oh s***! moments at higher levels.

They are trying to make the game friendly to new players, but they can sometimes take it too far.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Every GM I know, including myself, almost always fudges crits against 1st level characters made by monsters. It was kind of an unspoken rule that you didn't want your character to die right out of the gate.

I don't like fudging at all, but in this case it is useful.

I get their reasoning, but cutting out crits for monsters across the board leaves out exiting oh s***! moments at higher levels.

They are trying to make the game friendly to new players, but they can sometimes take it too far.

You know, as much as 5e is my favorite D&D rule set, taking newbie-friendlyness too far is by far my biggest complaint about it. That philosophy has so many knock-on effects that make the game less engaging for me.

 

[Reynard]

Every GM I know, including myself, almost always fudges crits against 1st level characters made by monsters. It was kind of an unspoken rule that you didn't want your character to die right out of the gate.

I don't like fudging at all, but in this case it is useful.

I get their reasoning, but cutting out crits for monsters across the board leaves out exiting oh s***! moments at higher levels.

They are trying to make the game friendly to new players, but they can sometimes take it too far.

I think it is hardly universal that people are precious about their low level PCs, and that GMs always fudge to protect them.

 

[Art Waring]

I think it is hardly universal that people are precious about their low level PCs, and that GMs always fudge to protect them.

I'm of course speaking only from my own personal experience.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I wonder if this is really "newbie" friendliness...after all, separate rules for NPCs and PCs actually adds to complexity...and more that the audience has changed over the decades away from system mastery and skilled play and more toward story telling and roleplaying. My sense, from my limited sample set of personal experience, is that many players who have joined since 5e, but aren't necessarily "new" anymore, don't get as much thrill from overcoming mechanical challenges as my nerdy friends and I did when we started playing. They seem to be more into their characters, and thus maybe less interested in a game where they might lose those characters.

I mean, from my point of view somebody who has been playing for 5 years is still "new", but what I'm saying is that I wonder if rules like this are targeted less at first time players, and more at the millions of players of the new generation.

 

[Reynard]

I'm of course speaking only from my own personal experience.

Fair enough. Your first paragraph suggested otherwise.