Implications of critical threats = critical hits

[Abisashi]

From another thread about house rules:

Critical Threat automatically cause Critical Hits.

An Analysis of the effects of having all threats automatically confirmed:

Qualitative:
Obviously, critical hits are going to be more common. Damage output goes up, but more so against high-AC creatures (since it is normally harder to confirm crits against them). This should make High-AC low hit-point creatures less viable (relative to other critable creatures; everythings threatened by crits has a lower life expectancy.) Because critable creatures are weaker, undead and other un-critables become relatively more powerful. Also, hoards of weaker creatures extend the levels at which they are dangerous; a group of goblin archers triple their damage output against high-level characters.

Because combat becomes faster, it is more random (less roles = less likely to get an even distribution, thus more random), and thus favors the monsters over the PCs, assuming there is an equal amount of crit-maximization is going on on both sides. Because large amounts of damage are easier for combat-types, they shift up in worth compared to rogues and spellcasters. On the other hand, at high levels, wizards become slightly more viable, as they will crit more... but with mostly 20/x2 weapons, this is a pretty small effect.

Because crits are more common, weapons with larger threat ranges/mutipliers become more dangerous. Power attacking is better, because the attack penalty won't hurt your chance of confirming a crit.

Corner-cases:
-Low armor warriors may now need to consider armor because it protects from small hits, which put them in range to be dropped by a critical hit, which are more prevalent.
-Burst weapons (that do extra damage on a crit) rise slightly in value, because they activate more often.
-Armor of fortification becomes more valuable, because its effect will be activated more often.
--As these are corner cases and small effects, I will ignore them.

Interactions with Non-Core:
Classes that increase threat-range/critical hit damage are more valuable; no specific issues known.

In summary:
-minor increase in combat speed

-minor drop in worth of armor
-minor increase in worth of martial characters
-minor increase in power of un-critable monsters and weak monsters
-minor increase in player mortality
-minor increase in power of high threat range/mutiplier weapons, power attack

Suggestions for Use: Use in more "grim-n-gritty" settings to emphasize the danger of combat.

Thoughts?

 

[Abisashi]

Quantitative Analysis

I'll do a quantitative analysis later, unless someone wants to do one for me.

My random test case indicates the damage goes up by about 10% - noticeable but not overwhelming. However, because this increases the average damage by increasing just the outliers, this is misleading. I would like to know how much more likely a fighter is to drop the BBEG in one hit - or the reverse case.

 

[Li Shenron]

You may also mention the fact that without confirmation roll the chance of critting becomes almost* independent from the character (from his attack modifier).

* "almost" because there is still a minority of cases when the threat range is 19-20 or larger and a natural 19 is of course not an automatic hit, therefore it depends of your attack modifier if you hit at all or not. For weapons with threat range 20, the chance to score a critical hit is completely independent of the character.

 

[Silveras]

-Power attacking is better, because the attack penalty won't hurt your chance of confirming a crit.
--As these are corner cases and small effects, I will ignore them.

I am not so sure that is wise. Power Attack was already pretty good, and a fairly common choice (lots of characters/classes want Cleave). This makes it much less of a question, especially against foes that would be hard to hit, anyway.

In addition, weapons with higher critical multipliers (x3, x4) are going to be more of a factor now. With their low threat range *and* the need for confirmation, they were occasionally beneficial. Without the need to confirm, though, they will be worth another look.

Consider the case of a Fighter or Barbarian using Power Attack (for 5) with a Great Axe (x3). Reduce the chance of hitting by 5 for 1d12+10+(Strx2), or maybe 3d12+30+(Strx6) damage.

 

[maggot]

With no confirmation roll, hoards of small creatures that attack in number become much more dangerous. Consider an attack by 20 kobold archers. Say they need 20s to hit because the party's AC is high enough. Now instead of one hit per volley of arrows with a chance of a x3 crit, it becomes one x3 crit per volley. That's a significant change.

Note also, the kobolds are much more dangerous with bows (x3 crit) than with crossbows (19-20/x2) if it takes a 20 to hit. So if you go with this rule, arm your kobold armies with picks.

 

[Abisashi]

I am not so sure that is wise.

Well, perhaps not, but the intent is to provide DMs with options with all the implications thought out so nothing surprises them.

Generally, power attacking is bad against mid-range creatures and good against creatures you only hit on a 20 or only miss on a one. I would like to know how much this affects that, but I just did a diffyQ project, so enough math for now. Regardless, I'll move this from corner cases to the general section.

You may also mention the fact that without confirmation roll the chance of critting becomes almost* independent from the character (from his attack modifier).

Consider it done. The main implication of this, I think, is that casters aren't quite as useless at high level without their spells... but since their weapons are usualy 20/x2, this is pretty small.

With no confirmation roll, hoards of small creatures that attack in number become much more dangerous.

This is, I think, a big reason one might want this rule - weak monsters can still be useable at higher levels, and the fighter can't fight the whole army of goblins by himself. A group of goblin archers vs. a high-level fighter under this rule triple their damage output, and even sword-wielding goblins double theirs. This definitely fits with the grim-n-gritty feel I talked about under suggested use.

Thanks for the input, anything else?

 

[Plane Sailing]

Consider it done. The main implication of this, I think, is that casters aren't quite as useless at high level without their spells... but since their weapons are usualy 20/x2, this is pretty small.

Wizards with touch attack spells (which can crit) would be laughing. Scorching ray, shocking grasp, enervation, polar ray, disintegration... all of those critting on a 20/x2 raises damage potential nicely.

Did you mention the value of keen enchantments and improved critical feats? They both clearly become more valuable under this model.

(I like the way it makes hordes of low level creatures more dangerous, BTW)

 

[tiornys]

Under normal rules, X% (usu. 5-15, 10-30 with a keen effect) of your total hits are criticals. Under this variant, X% of your total attacks are criticals. This makes extra attacks really really really really good. Rapid Shot, Flurry (especially with 2 extra attacks), TWF chain, multiple limbs, natural attacks, etc.

So creatures with lots of attacks like hydras, dragons, displacer beasts, pouncing cats, mariliths, etc. are potentially more powerful in relation to CR than big things with fewer attacks, like golems, elementals, and treants.

t~

 

[Darkness]

hoards of weaker creatures extend the levels at which they are dangerous; a group of goblin archers triple their damage output against high-level characters.

Not to mention that the increased number of crits the PCs will cause under this rule won't hurt the goblins much; they'd probably go down on a normal hit anyway and a crit can't make go down more.

That's a further advantage for the monsters, IMO. (As a group; obviously, the poor goblin who loses 39 hp instead of 14 because of this rule might disagree - but he's out of the fight either way.) Or rather, the lack of an advantage for the PCs.