Less deadly crits

[Grayhawk]

For an upcomming campaign starting at 1st level I'm considering changing the way critical hits work, to the following:

On a confirmed crit you only multiply the weapon's damage die. (Not all the bonuses too.)

My reason for doing this, is that I want the lower strenght meleers to not fall too far behind the damage output of those with high damage bonuses (and high crit multipliers), as well as playing up the difference between weapons.

Now, before you jump all over this, saying how it messes too much with the game balance, consider the following: I'm only using core rules (no epic play here), and I'm not going by the CR system, instead relying on my experience and instincts as to what a proper challenge will be.

So while characters under this crit variant will have a lower damage output, the opposition will be adjusted accordingly.

Also, IMC you can't buy magic items, so I don't care if this makes the Keen weapon ability overpriced, or some such.

As to the Improved Critical feat, I will reduce it's prereq to BAB +6, as I don't think this will be unbalanced (but will it still be worth getting?).

In another thread Mike Sullivan made an excellent analysis of when (at which bonus to damage) it would pay off to use a weapon with higher threat range, compared to a higher damage dealing weapon with lower threat range.

With the system I propose here, wont the weapons keep being balanced against each other?

Any reasons why this is a bad idea?

(Especially considering that I will be using it for a low level campaign. I'm aware that this would make crits insignificant at higher levels, where the bonuses to damage far outweigh the weapons damage die.)

 

[Staffan]

This change would still maintain the balance between weapons that only differ in crit-ness (e.g. longsword/battleaxe). However, it would significantly weaken weapons that rely on crits over base damage - this includes both heavy-hitters (picks/scythes) and often-critters (rapiers/scimitars).

With the regular system, over the course of 20 hits a longsword or battleaxe will do a total of 22d8+22*bonuses, whereas a rapier or pick will do 23d6+23* bonuses. What your system will do is change the 22*bonuses and 23*bonuses both to 20*bonuses. In the regular system, high-crit weapons become better than high-base-damage weapons at certain damage bonuses, wheras with your system they'll always lag behind.

Not saying it's a horrible and unholy change or anything, just pointing out the math a bit.

 

[Nifft]

This is what I do in my campaign too, with one exception: the bonus damage from Weapon Specialization is multiplied.

This change eliminates all sorts of "smackdown" problems, and it also allows me to let big, strong monsters like Ogres crit more often without being too deadly. Also, it allows critters too weak to do much damage still be SLIGHTLY effective on a crit -- since you only SUBTRACT penalties once, too!

I've been using these rules in a campaign for about 8 months, and have had no problems with them.

-- Nifft

 

[Gothmog]

Yep, I do the exact same thing in my game, and have for the last 2 years. Multiplying all the bonuses seemed really excessive to me, especially when in one campaign I play in the dwarven defender crits on a 17-20 with his axe, doing 3d10+45 damage per hit! 3d10+15 keeps the damage from the weapon mattering more than the damage from bonuses.

 

[ValarX]

Excellent Rule

I think that this idea is great. The stipulation can be put more simply by saying that strength modifiers are not included in crit multipliers. This means that magical enhancements and specialization still works towards the damage of the weapon, and makes specialization a much more valuable feat. I might try using this one myself.

 

[comrade raoul]

It does make Improved Critical all-but-worthless, even with the lowered BAB requirement you suggest. Consider the math: with the original critical hit system, the average critical damage a character could statistically expect to do (under most cases, excluding extra damage from energy weapons or sneak attacks) was equal to his normal damage multiplied by the product of his chance to cause a critical hit (always less than one) times one less than his critical hit multiplier. For example, a character with a falchion or scythe caused statistically expected critical damage equal to 15% of his normal damage. Improved Critical or a keen effect, by doubling his threat range, each add an additional 15% of critical damage.

If you only multiply base damage, the formula for expected critical damage uses base damage, rather than normal damage. The expected critical damage of a falchion or scythe is always 5 (the average damage of a falchion) * 0.15, or 0.75; for a greatsword, it's 7 * 0.1, or 0.7. That means Improved Critical (falchion) adds an additional 0.75 points of expected damage (and only against creatures vulnerable to critical hits), making it much, much worse than Weapon Specialization and almost indubitably the worst feat in the game this side of Skill Focus (Profession (basketweaver)). The keen enchantment is wildly overpriced, but, since you (wisely) prohibit the purchase of magical items, I guess this isn't a problem.

Note an interesting corrolary: even with a maximized threat range, weapons with higher damage are always better than weapons that are good at causing critical hits. This analysis reveals that the expected damage, counting criticals, of a keen falchion in the hands of a character with Improved Critical is 5 + (0.45 * 5) or 7.15; a comparable greatsword wielder can expect to do 7 + (0.3 * 7) or 9.1 points.

It wouldn't be too unbalanced to just give characters Improved Critical for free when they take Weapon Focus in a weapon. Otherwise, you'd want to beef up the feat significantly -- perhaps also allow characters with Improved Critical to automatically confirm threats, and/or to multiply all non-Strength damage bonuses on a critical hit.

edited to clear up some sentence structure and revise some math.

 

[Staffan]

Yep, I do the exact same thing in my game, and have for the last 2 years. Multiplying all the bonuses seemed really excessive to me, especially when in one campaign I play in the dwarven defender crits on a 17-20 with his axe, doing 3d10+45 damage per hit! 3d10+15 keeps the damage from the weapon mattering more than the damage from bonuses.

How do you get threat range 17-20 with an axe? If you start with a threat range of 20 and add Improved Crit or Keen, you end up with 19-20. If you then add the other one, you get 18-20.

And Comrade Raoul? Basketweaving would be a Craft, not a Profession