D&D (2024) Enhanced Critical Hits (Dynamic Critical Hits, WIP+)

[Xeviat]

Hi everybody!

Gearing up to start my first 5.5 game, and I'm gathering up my houserules (someone else us running a vanilla game, I'm the homebrewer in the group). I draw on a lot of prior editions and A5E in my games, and I started looking at Critical Hits.

I've never liked 5E's "double the dice, not the modifier" method of Critical Hits. Rolling 2 1's on Critical damage feels bad. But just max damage from 4E is kind of boring. And then there as 3E, with Critical threat making us roll over again.

So why not mix them all? Here's my Critical hit variant: Dynamic Critical Hits.

VARIANT: DYNAMIC CRITICAL HITS
When you roll a 20 on an attack roll, you score a Critical Hit. Rather than rolling for damage, a Critical Hit deals maximum damage and then you repeat the attack against the same target. If the second attack roll Hits the target's AC, roll damage and add it to the Attack's total damage. If the second attack roll is a 20, the Critical Hit deals double maximum damage.

Generally, this shouldn't result in too many more dice rolls, as you don't roll damage if the second attack roll misses (you just get bonus damage). Max damage is close to double dice, just slightly lower (specifically, average damage on double dice is +0.5 higher than max damage per die; 2d8 is 9 vs 8, 4d6 is 14 vs 12), but it adds in the potential for exploding damage (which can be fun).

But what's the math look like? Let's compare a basic fighter and see how it works out.

65% to hit, 1d8+5 damage (1d8 weapon, 16 stat, duelist style)

Core: 6.4
Dynamic: 6.6675

So it is only a small boost in damage, but I think it will prove to be more fun.

If I just had Critical Hits be double damage across the board, that would be 6.65, so still in the same ballpark.

What do you think?

 

[ezo]

What do you think?

It could work, of course, it just depends on if you want the extra time that pops up on the natural 20 for the second ("confirmation") roll. Do you allow additional rolls for more critical explosions beyond the 1st? Or does this limit you to the maximum twice the damage die?

Personally, instead of double damage dice for crits on 20 I prefer the max damage + damage roll rule a lot of people use.

Otherwise, my preference is for critical damage instead critical hits. Any damage roll that is maximum adds another die. Simple and fun IME, and you don't worry if you hit with a 20 or a 10 or whatever--as long as you hit.

 

[Charlaquin]

Hi everybody!

Gearing up to start my first 5.5 game, and I'm gathering up my houserules (someone else us running a vanilla game, I'm the homebrewer in the group). I draw on a lot of prior editions and A5E in my games, and I started looking at Critical Hits.

I've never liked 5E's "double the dice, not the modifier" method of Critical Hits. Rolling 2 1's on Critical damage feels bad. But just max damage from 4E is kind of boring. And then there as 3E, with Critical threat making us roll over again.

So why not mix them all? Here's my Critical hit variant: Dynamic Critical Hits.



Generally, this shouldn't result in too many more dice rolls, as you don't roll damage if the second attack roll misses (you just get bonus damage). Max damage is close to double dice, just slightly lower (specifically, average damage on double dice is +0.5 higher than max damage per die; 2d8 is 9 vs 8, 4d6 is 14 vs 12), but it adds in the potential for exploding damage (which can be fun).

But what's the math look like? Let's compare a basic fighter and see how it works out.

65% to hit, 1d8+5 damage (1d8 weapon, 16 stat, duelist style)

Core: 6.4
Dynamic: 6.6675

So it is only a small boost in damage, but I think it will prove to be more fun.

If I just had Critical Hits be double damage across the board, that would be 6.65, so still in the same ballpark.

What do you think?

I used this exact rule way back during the D&D Next playtest. It worked fine, didn’t feel unbalanced or anything. I did have one player who suddenly startled rolling a suspicious amount of double nat 20s as soon as I implemented that rule, but… well, that was part of a bigger problem with that particular player. The rule itself was perfectly cromulent.

I ended up abandoning it, mostly because I didn’t feel like it added enough to be worth the extra dice rolling. It’s a little thing, but that crit confirmation roll, in my experience, dampens the excitement of critical hits. Even though this rule is all upside, it turns a natural 20 from “wohoo, more damage!” to “Let’s roll another die and do more math to see how much more damage,” which is much less exciting. And, of course, there’s the fact that all critical hit rules are more beneficial for the monsters than they are for the players. So the stronger critical hits are, the swingier combat gets, and the more that swing is weighted in the monsters’ favor. YMMV on if that’s positive or negative, but for me it was negative.

 

[FrogReaver]

Hi everybody!

Gearing up to start my first 5.5 game, and I'm gathering up my houserules (someone else us running a vanilla game, I'm the homebrewer in the group). I draw on a lot of prior editions and A5E in my games, and I started looking at Critical Hits.

I've never liked 5E's "double the dice, not the modifier" method of Critical Hits. Rolling 2 1's on Critical damage feels bad. But just max damage from 4E is kind of boring. And then there as 3E, with Critical threat making us roll over again.

So why not mix them all? Here's my Critical hit variant: Dynamic Critical Hits.



Generally, this shouldn't result in too many more dice rolls, as you don't roll damage if the second attack roll misses (you just get bonus damage). Max damage is close to double dice, just slightly lower (specifically, average damage on double dice is +0.5 higher than max damage per die; 2d8 is 9 vs 8, 4d6 is 14 vs 12), but it adds in the potential for exploding damage (which can be fun).

But what's the math look like? Let's compare a basic fighter and see how it works out.

65% to hit, 1d8+5 damage (1d8 weapon, 16 stat, duelist style)

Core: 6.4
Dynamic: 6.6675

So it is only a small boost in damage, but I think it will prove to be more fun.

If I just had Critical Hits be double damage across the board, that would be 6.65, so still in the same ballpark.

What do you think?

It's more the variance.

In your example 35% of the times you crit the Crit does max damage (similar to rolling twice damage dice, but just a little lower). However, 65% of the times you crit the Crit does an average of a regular crits damage + another attacks worth of damage. In most situations thats alot more damage from a crit than just doubling crit damage.

Since anything that makes combat more variable impacts players more because players have a vested interest in their PC's through multiple combats and enemies don't really matter save for the 1 combat. One thing I'd recommend doing is taking some higher damage enemies and see how much damage they do with one of your crits and see if the Crit is potentially knocking PC's down fairly regularly. Because if so, going from full hp to 0 in one unlucky hit is something players will find frustrating.

Ultimately though, whether this change is good for your group is up to them. It's not something I'd really like though.

 

[FrogReaver]

My suggestion for a critical hit rule that might be more fun for the players would be, critical hits cause a negative effect. Maybe something like giving them advantage to be hit until the end of your next turn. This allows allies time to help the critted pc. It makes the battle more dynamic. Etc.

 

[Distracted DM]

My suggestion for a critical hit rule that might be more fun for the players would be, critical hits cause a negative effect. Maybe something like giving them advantage to be hit until the end of your next turn. This allows allies time to help the critted pc. It makes the battle more dynamic. Etc.

It's a good idea! I've sort of adopted the DCC critical hits+fumbles charts for my Dark Sun-styled game, and a lot of those either result in prone, stun, disarmed, knocked back, etc.

 

[FrogReaver]

It's a good idea! I've sort of adopted the DCC critical hits+fumbles charts for my Dark Sun-styled game, and a lot of those either result in prone, stun, disarmed, knocked back, etc.

Thanks, though I actually dislike conditions that take away player actions. So stun, disarmed, etc I wouldn't be a general fan of. Knocked back or prone would probably be fine.

Also, action denial effects are bad when it's 4 pcs vs 1 bbeg, if crits there have a good chance of taking away actions because they'll likely be some crits there.

 

[Distracted DM]

Thanks, though I actually dislike conditions that take away player actions. So stun, disarmed, etc I wouldn't be a general fan of. Knocked back or prone would probably be fine.

Also, action denial effects are bad when it's 4 pcs vs 1 bbeg, if crits there have a good chance of taking away actions because they'll likely be some crits there.

Oh maybe I misunderstood, are you suggesting that only the player characters' crits are altered to cause effects?
Though I can't say disarming a PC is too awful

 

[Horwath]

beat AC by 5, +50% damage
beat AC by 10, +100% damage
beat AC by 15, +150% damage
beat AC by 20, +200% damage

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Even better: repeat the attack against the target until you miss. Now that's a Critical Hit!