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

[ezo]

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

LOL forget critical hits... do that ALL the time!!!

 

[AnotherGuy]

I'm not a fan of adding additional die rolls in combat.
For me, it is either work on degrees of success or use the max damage + an additional die for the crits

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

LOL forget critical hits... do that ALL the time!!!

If monsters damage were buffed like 4x, and only have attacks when you miss, that would be strangely cinematic!

I'm strangely tempted to test the " press the attack" critical hit. Champions would be dangerous...

 

[FrogReaver]

Oh maybe I misunderstood, are you suggesting that only the player characters' crits are altered to cause effects?

No.

Though I can't say disarming a PC is too awful

 

[dave2008]

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?

why not max damage + the rolled damage?

 

[Xeviat]

why not max damage + the rolled damage?

Max damage + the rolled damage increases the average damage more than I'd want, but just max damage feels boring. It was mostly a rule idea, just exploring slightly more complex options that could open up design space for more.

 

[dave2008]

Max damage + the rolled damage increases the average damage more than I'd want, but just max damage feels boring. It was mostly a rule idea, just exploring slightly more complex options that could open up design space for more.

We use max damage + rolled it has worked well for us; but our game is not typical either so I can't say it will work for you or not.

 

[ezo]

Max damage + the rolled damage increases the average damage more than I'd want

Actually, it is less than your "dynamic" system. Using the 65% at d8+5 base the damage of critical max damage + rolled damage is 6.575, nearly 0.1 less than dynamic critical hits.

But I have thinking about this a bit more and after reading replies and responses, I guess I want to make sure I understand your goals here:

1. Remove the disappointing double-dice low roll disappointment on critical hits.
2. The "fun" of the added d20 roll adds excitement on a critical hit.
3. Max damage alone is boring.
4. Max damage plus a roll is too much. (which is not true at 65% hit chance)

Using the d8+5 at 65% example in the OP:

1. 2d8 will roll below 8 about 33% of the time, and equals 8 another 11% of the time. When the result of the 2d8 is less than what is possible on 1d8 about 44% of the time, the feeling of the critical hit is lost.

2. You only roll the extra d20 on a 20, so it isn't often, and adds to the tension of the critical hit resolution. While some might not like the extra time, it encourages critical hits to be celebrated.

3. You are still doing max damage on the nat 20, but the possibility of extra damage on the additional hit keeps it from being boring.

4. As I stated above, you actually do less damage with max damage + rolled damage than dynamic damage. However, it is removing the "fun" element of the extra d20 roll.

Overall, I think your idea is a good one if the goal isn't just the damage, but the added fun of the extra d20 roll. You know given max damage on the first 20 you will have good damage (at worse) and have the fun of the extra roll for more damage. Frankly, as rare as it happens, I wouldn't stop at one extra roll. If the second d20 was also a 20, give max damage again and another roll! Keep it going on nat 20s until it stops!

 

[Xeviat]

Actually, it is less than your "dynamic" system. Using the 65% at d8+5 base the damage of critical max damage + rolled damage is 6.575, nearly 0.1 less than dynamic critical hits.

But I have thinking about this a bit more and after reading replies and responses, I guess I want to make sure I understand your goals here:

1. Remove the disappointing double-dice low roll disappointment on critical hits.
2. The "fun" of the added d20 roll adds excitement on a critical hit.
3. Max damage alone is boring.
4. Max damage plus a roll is too much. (which is not true at 65% hit chance)

Using the d8+5 at 65% example in the OP:

1. 2d8 will roll below 8 about 33% of the time, and equals 8 another 11% of the time. When the result of the 2d8 is less than what is possible on 1d8 about 44% of the time, the feeling of the critical hit is lost.

2. You only roll the extra d20 on a 20, so it isn't often, and adds to the tension of the critical hit resolution. While some might not like the extra time, it encourages critical hits to be celebrated.

3. You are still doing max damage on the nat 20, but the possibility of extra damage on the additional hit keeps it from being boring.

4. As I stated above, you actually do less damage with max damage + rolled damage than dynamic damage. However, it is removing the "fun" element of the extra d20 roll.

Overall, I think your idea is a good one if the goal isn't just the damage, but the added fun of the extra d20 roll. You know given max damage on the first 20 you will have good damage (at worse) and have the fun of the extra roll for more damage. Frankly, as rare as it happens, I wouldn't stop at one extra roll. If the second d20 was also a 20, give max damage again and another roll! Keep it going on nat 20s until it stops!

Having the Crits keep exploding is something that could be extra fun, but I left it out because I worry it would affect the PCs more. I could simply say mooks don't get critical hits, but I'm not sure I'd want that differentiation.

 

[ezo]

Having the Crits keep exploding is something that could be extra fun, but I left it out because I worry it would affect the PCs more. I could simply say mooks don't get critical hits, but I'm not sure I'd want that differentiation.

It is a 1 in 400 chance to go beyond the normal critical hit. It affects both normally. Sure, creatures are always live or die blah blah blah but PCs heal and move on. Given the vast amount of HP creatures have, I wouldn't worry about it frankly.

When it happens, people will remember it. I know once I saw someone roll seven natural 20's in a row when we did confirmed exploding criticals in 3E. I doubt I'll never forget it.