D&D 5E not so critical hit

[Jester David]

I imagine they're still testing alternate approaches to see what people react to and like. See what gets the ire up.

I like max + a die. Just max damage feels static. You're excited after a crit and want to roll something.
But max + a die is really close to doubling damage, which is a lot to do 5% of the time. 3e made you confirm to double the damage.

 

[Cyberen]

I like max + a die. Just max damage feels static. You're excited after a crit and want to roll something.
But max + a die is really close to doubling damage, which is a lot to do 5% of the time. 3e made you confirm to double the damage.

Wrong math. Max [W] + [W] is averaging very close to 3[W] BUT 3.x critical damage had nothing to do with these values, as most damage dealt was coming from bonuses. In the case of single attacks, confirming was a joke, as most to-hit rolls were 95% chance however. For full round attacks, secondary or tertiary crits were just a cherry on the damage galore cake.

I love Max[W]+[W] on a crit. Straightforward, crystal clear, fast, fun, limited effect.

 

[Li Shenron]

I liked rolling multiple dice in 3ed a bit more than just dealing max damage, but I wouldn't mind this second option.

Frankly, criticals on a Natural 20 without confirmation rolls means they are going to be a common occurrence, and as such I don't expect them to have particularly interesting effects. In fact, I could live fine without criticals, except for reasons of tradition and legacy. With this in mind, I'd prefer the rule for criticals be as simple as possible.

Otherwise, make criticals more rare, and based on how infrequent they are, increase the effects to something more dramatic, optionally with a table of special effects.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I prefer max damage on a crit. It's simple and easy to remember. It's powerful without being too swingy. It also makes sense. I always thought it was a bit ridiculous that you could crit but then roll 1s on your damage dice, and in some cases do less damage on a critical hit than you do on a regular hit.

 

[billd91]

I prefer max damage on a crit. It's simple and easy to remember. It's powerful without being too swingy. It also makes sense. I always thought it was a bit ridiculous that you could crit but then roll 1s on your damage dice, and in some cases do less damage on a critical hit than you do on a regular hit.

But if it's just max damage, then, effectively, 1 in 4 hits with a dagger (or any other weapon that does 1d4 damage) is a critical hit. That isn't particularly special or "critical", though it is less swingy.

 

[Warbringer]

[MENTION=3400]billd91[/MENTION] .. Yep, this is my major issue

Not sure how max + roll another die is in any complex, difficult to remember, or swingy

 

[Falling Icicle]

But if it's just max damage, then, effectively, 1 in 4 hits with a dagger (or any other weapon that does 1d4 damage) is a critical hit. That isn't particularly special or "critical", though it is less swingy.

That doesn't really bother me. Though, I would like them to have something like the critical hit cards they have in Pathfinder as an optional thing. Those are a lot of fun.

 

[Ainamacar]

I mentioned this is in an older thread, but I'd like to see them test a critical hit that grants extra damage equal to maximum possible damage of all rolled dice. Example: A critical hit on an attack that normally does 3d6+5 damage instead does 3d6+5+18 damage.

There is never any extra rolling to do, every critical hit is better than every non-critical hit, it never feels like a damage roll is wasted, and the effect is independent of non-die bonuses (unlike those using total damage multipliers). Ignoring non-dice bonuses to damage for a second, on average these critical hits do more than they would in a usual 2x system, but they never exceed the best possible damage in a 2x system. If one compares it to a traditional 2x system that does include (positive) non-dice bonuses, its best possible crits are lower in absolute damage, but the worst possible crits are still likely to be better, or at least with less disparity between characters.