Math question for Critical hit house rule

[CRGreathouse]

I would like it to be weaker than WS.

I was just hoping that the 'no need to confirm, threat range stays the same' would be better than my current house rule.

If the players normally hit more than half the time, this is worse for them. If they normally hit less than half the time, this is better for them.

Either way it's weaker than WS.

 

[Grayhawk]

If the players normally hit more than half the time, this is worse for them. If they normally hit less than half the time, this is better for them.

Either way it's weaker than WS.

Does this mean that if they hit half the time they're equal?

Would either of them be worth a feat, or are they just too weak?

 

[CRGreathouse]

Does this mean that if they hit half the time they're equal?

Would either of them be worth a feat, or are they just too weak?

Ye, they're equal when the characters hit half the time. With multiple attacks it's harder to judge...

It's a little weak for a feat, I think, but I wouldn't worry about that overmuch.

 

[ichabod]

Would it be possible to work out specific examples for 3 different weapons, each time comparing the two variants (v1: As normal, but only multiplies weap's damage die, v2: Doesn't increase threat range, only multiplies weap's damage die, but doesn't require confirmation roll) with Specialization, for a total of 27 calculations:

Someone with a Scimitar hitting on a rol of 10, a roll of 15, and a roll of 20.

Someone with a Longsword hitting on a rol of 10, a roll of 15, and a roll of 20.

Someone with a Battleaxe hitting on a rol of 10, a roll of 15, and a roll of 20.

Thanks to those that'll take up the challenge

Note that there were some errors with my spreadsheet and I was confused about your house rules. Hopefully the following is what you want

Okay, all of these are for a fighter with a str of 10, so the str bonus multiplication is completely dropped out. In order: op1 increases threat, requires confirmation; op2 doesn't increase threat, does not require confirmation; op3 is weapon specialization (straight +2 to damage), only multiplies damage die.

Scimitar needs 10: 2.98, 2.88, 3.85
Scimitar needs 15: 1.37, 2.10, 2.15
Scimitar needs 20: 0.18, 0.35, 0.29
op3 best <= 15, op2 best >= 16

Longsword needs 10: 3.38, 3.29, 4.23
Longsword needs 15: 1.76, 2.70, 2.54
Longsword needs 20: 0.24, 0.45, 0.34
op3 best <= 14, op2 best >= 15

Battleaxe needs 10: 3.38, 3.29, 4.23
Battleaxe needs 15: 2.16, 2.85, 2.60
Battleaxe needs 20: 0.25, 0.68, 0.38
op3 best <= 14, op2 best >= 15

Now, I have been brain farting enough today to power Bartertown, so maybe CRG could spot check a few of these numbers?

 

[CRGreathouse]

Now, I have been brain farting enough today to power Bartertown, so maybe CRG could spot check a few of these numbers?

Sorry, I'm getting different numbers. Are we calculating the same thing, though? I'm figuring average damage in each situation.

Scimitar
2 4.3225 3.85 5.72375
3 4.095 3.675 5.4225
4 3.8675 3.5 5.12125
5 3.64 3.325 4.82
6 3.4125 3.15 4.51875
7 3.185 2.975 4.2175
8 2.9575 2.8 3.91625
9 2.73 2.625 3.615
10 2.5025 2.45 3.31375
11 2.275 2.275 3.0125
12 2.0475 2.1 2.71125
13 1.82 1.925 2.41
14 1.5925 1.75 2.10875
15 1.365 1.575 1.8075
16 1.09375 1.4 1.50625
17 0.84 1.225 1.205
18 0.60375 1.05 0.90375
19 0.385 0.7 0.585
20 0.18375 0.35 0.28375

Longsword or battleaxe
2 5.13 4.725 6.6025
3 4.86 4.5 6.255
4 4.59 4.275 5.9075
5 4.32 4.05 5.56
6 4.05 3.825 5.2125
7 3.78 3.6 4.865
8 3.51 3.375 4.5175
9 3.24 3.15 4.17
10 2.97 2.925 3.8225
11 2.7 2.7 3.475
12 2.43 2.475 3.1275
13 2.16 2.25 2.78
14 1.89 2.025 2.4325
15 1.62 1.8 2.085
16 1.35 1.575 1.7375
17 1.08 1.35 1.39
18 0.77625 1.125 1.0425
19 0.495 0.9 0.695
20 0.23625 0.45 0.33625

Scimitar (condensed as asked)
10 2.5025 2.45 3.31375
15 1.365 1.575 1.8075
20 0.18375 0.35 0.28375

Longsword or battleaxe (condensed as asked)
10 2.97 2.925 3.8225
15 1.62 1.8 2.085
20 0.23625 0.45 0.33625

O3 is best for the longsword or battleaxe for 2-17; O2 is better for 18-20.
O3 is best for the scimitar for 2-16; O2 is better for 17-20.

O1 is never better than O3 for any of these weapons. O1 is sometimes better than O2, but only when O3 is better than both.

 

[Grayhawk]

Thanks a lot guys!

After seing the results I'll let Improved Critical do away with the confirmation roll instead of increasing the threat range.

That this sometimes will be better than Weapon Specialization makes me think that it's actually worth a feat (and Fighters will still be the only ones who can benefit from both feats...)

Besides, having to roll a confirmation roll seems anticlimatic to me.

When you need to roll within your threat range to hit, every hit will be a crit, but I don't mind this so much, as these crits don't multiply damage bonuses. (You might explain it this way: Somebody can be so well protected that you need to hit them exeptionally well to hurt them.)

Hopefully, this won't make Keen too attractive...

 

[CRGreathouse]

Hopefully, this won't make Keen too attractive...

If it does, just use lots of undead.

 

[Grayhawk]

If it does, just use lots of undead.

I think I'll do that no matter what.

You know, better safe than sorry

 

[ichabod]

Sorry, I'm getting different numbers. Are we calculating the same thing, though? I'm figuring average damage in each situation.

No, that's what I was figuring. I think I overthought the probability of critical hit or something, you're numbers are probably the right ones.