Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8520325" data-attributes="member: 6987520">There is a direct correlation:Increased skill/attack rolls leads to increased chances of hitting leads to dealing damage.Example:PC A has +5 attack, B has +10 attack, both deal 1d8+4 damage and are attacking AC 16.Ignoring crits, the expected damage of A is 4.25 per attack, but B is 6.375, over 2 points better per attack.So, the additional +5 on the attack roll of B over A directly impacts damage by increasing it by more than 2 points per attack.That is the direct correlation.Will both hit on the same roll of 19, sure, but one misses on a 9, and the other hits. As I said upthread, the attack roll is (and was meant to be) binary: hit or miss. Adding the crit on 20 messed it up and got people thinking that &quot;the higher the roll the better&quot; which really isn't the case.You could make it the case, but then you are &quot;double-awarding&quot; higher attack bonuses both because you are more likely to hit AND adding even more damage on a lucky higher roll. Not something I think is necessary, but if you want that, as others have posted there are plenty of ways to implement it.Personally, I would rather see crits based on hitting by a certain amount instead of natural 20.&nbsp; <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging&nbsp; &nbsp; :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 8520325, member: 6987520"] There is a direct correlation: Increased skill/attack rolls leads to increased chances of hitting leads to dealing damage. Example: PC A has +5 attack, B has +10 attack, both deal 1d8+4 damage and are attacking AC 16. Ignoring crits, the expected damage of A is 4.25 per attack, but B is 6.375, over 2 points better per attack. So, the additional +5 on the attack roll of B over A directly impacts damage by increasing it by more than 2 points per attack. That is the direct correlation. Will both hit on the same roll of 19, sure, but one misses on a 9, and the other hits. As I said upthread, the attack roll is (and was meant to be) binary: hit or miss. Adding the crit on 20 messed it up and got people thinking that "the higher the roll the better" which really isn't the case. You could [I]make[/I] it the case, but then you are "double-awarding" higher attack bonuses both because you are more likely to hit [I]AND[/I] adding even more damage on a lucky higher roll. Not something I think is necessary, but if you want that, as others have posted there are plenty of ways to implement it. Personally, I would rather see crits based on hitting by a certain amount instead of natural 20. 🤷‍♂️ [/QUOTE]

Verification