Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 354583" data-attributes="member: 3146">Well there are advantages and disadvantages to having fewer more massive crits. The disadvantage is that you don't get as many of them. The advantage is that when you do get a crit, you typically kill your foe rather than just injure them a bit more. For instance, in a game I recently played, a hasted human fighter/cleric using a longsword made a partial charge plus full attack. He hit with the first attack, critted with the second, and hit with his secondary attack. All told, he did about 67 points of damage and dropped his foe. It was very impressive.Had he been wielding a battle axe, however, the crit on the second attack would have dropped his foe allowing him to take his third attack on the big plant creature we were fighting. (And, with one more attack, the creature might have died before it killed our cleric--it did die on the next party member's action after it killed our cleric). On the other hand, he might not have critted at all with the battle axe (I don't remember if it was a natural 20 or a 19 he rolled), in which case, we would have been even worse off.Personally, I'm a bigger fan of crit ranges than massive crits too but there's definitely a mathematical advantage to 19-20/x3 over 18-20/x2. And the mathematical difference needs to be considered when designing rules. (And I'd definitely pick 19-20/x3 over 18-20/x2--I'm not that attached to getting lots of criticals).</blockquote>

Verification