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

[robus]

How do you all feel about the proposed change to crits affecting the PC's?
I know my players and I will not be following that bit of advice but I was curious about how everyone else feels about this.

I also won’t be doing that but I’ve also changed critical hits from players so that they have some impact to the fight beyond just doing damage, for example if an NPC is using concentration to some effect against the PCs then a critical hit from a player would force that NPC to drop concentration. Basically the critical hit gives some momentary beneficial effect whatever makes sense in the fiction.

It makes for much more impactful moments IMHO.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've never liked the Save DC vs Save modifier progression in 5e. Your good saves keep up with level appropriate DCs as long as you also increase the related attribute whenever you can. Every other save will fall further and further behind as you level up. Only paladins with high CHA ever get to be good at saving throws.

In 2e a high level fighter was very resistant to most magical effects because of his good saving throws, but in 5e that same fighter will easily be shut down by any effect targeting anything other than STR or CON.

You could fix that by just having fighters be proficient in all saves by an early level. Why should monks have all the fun?

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I'm going hard the other direction on this one. I generally played crits by RAW, but if RAW is no longer going to make sense for me and I'm houseruling things anyway, I'm just going to make crits double all damage (ie: the simplest possible crit rule), rather than having to explain how to calculate it properly to at least one person in every group I ever play with every time they roll a crit.

I don't subscribe to the theory that the designers don't play the game, but I would theorize based on this needlessly convoluted scheme for something that already commonly caused confusion (generally over whether to double dice, or double dice results) that they don't play it very often with a typical range of players.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

The reason you like it is the reason I don't. I don't judge a creature's combat ability based on their narrative role in D&D. That is a different kind of game.

You're right. That is a very different kind of game. But D&D has always been a different game to different people, so this isn't surprising. It's just strange to me.

So what exactly are you judging, if not their abilities? Their dice skills? Their ability to produce more 20s than other creatures? If the excitement of the game hinges only on the potential of rolling a random die result, which no player or creature has any consistent influence or control over, then what does that say about the game when is operating under "normal" parameters?

Does anyone ever really think to themselves, "I hope I get to see some 20s during tonight's game, otherwise it's just going to be boring!" (According to a few posters, I believe some actually do!)

 

[Micah Sweet]

You know you still get to roll dice for damage, right? So there's still the "thrill" of rolling really good or really bad in the department that really counts: damage dealt.

What do crits do anyway, except force more math on people? "Double these numbers, but not those!" This is supposed to be a fun game, not calculus!

But if that's still not good enough to get your geek-heart pumping, try exploding damage dice. For those who don't know what that is: Whenever a damage die rolls its maximum value (a 4 on a d4, an 8 on a d8, etc.), you roll an extra die and add that. And who doesn't love rolling more dice, especially if that is what makes the game actually fun? Choices don't matter when you can just roll 20s all day.

Doubling numbers is actually basic arithmetic, not calculus. I think most folks can handle that.

 

[tetrasodium]

The usual difference - if you want something that isn't the game's default, you likely have a fight on your hands with the players.

yes but in this case it requires no buyin from the players if a GM wants to say all monsters can crit or this monster can crit

 

[Jacob Lewis]

Doubling numbers is actually basic arithmetic, not calculus. I think most folks can handle that.

Maybe, but some definitely have difficulty with sarcasm and jokes.

 

[MGibster]

This thread is literally the first time I’ve ever heard anyone complain about the existence of crits in D&D. Those of you who want them removed have made good arguments, I understand your point, but I can’t help but cock my head to one side and say, “What? This is a problem?”

If the problem is that some random mook might end a character’s narrative, maybe the problem is really all the meaningless fights in D&D. It does seem like the newer batch of players are more risk averse, which I say with no disdain, I’d argue my generation was more risk adverse than the gaming generation that came before mine. I certainly have no interest in some of the meat grinders that classic adventures of the past were.

More and more I keep thinking D&D isn’t for me anymore. And that’s okay, things change and the audience today is different from what it was in 1992. But this just feels like another nail in the coffin for me.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This thread is literally the first time I’ve ever heard anyone complain about the existence of crits in D&D. Those of you who want them removed have made good arguments, I understand your point, but I can’t help but cock my head to one side and say, “What? This is a problem?”

If the problem is that some random mook might end a character’s narrative, maybe the problem is really all the meaningless fights in D&D. It does seem like the newer batch of players are more risk averse, which I say with no disdain, I’d argue my generation was more risk adverse than the gaming generation that came before mine. I certainly have no interest in some of the meat grinders that classic adventures of the past were.

More and more I keep thinking D&D isn’t for me anymore. And that’s okay, things change and the audience today is different from what it was in 1992. But this just feels like another nail in the coffin for me.

I mean, this is quite a lot of chat, but as I explained earlier, the reason they're removing crits from monsters is pretty clearly because of the two other rules they're adding to crits (weapons only, and base weapon damage only) and how they don't apply well to monsters.

I don't think this basic-ass balancing measure is the generation-gap madness you seem to think it is lol. (To be clear I get that you're not condemning it, just shaking your head, but dude, this is about making monsters balanced, not about "lets get rid of crits for Gen Z!". If they weren't suggesting the other changes, I don't think they'd be suggesting this.)

 

[Maxperson]

If the PCs don't want to potentially get splatted by monsters, maybe they shouldn't be fighting the monsters.

I've long maintained that high wisdom and adventuring are mutually exclusive.