The monster 'crit' problem

[SeRiAlExPeRiMeNtS]

There is a table with the damage die expresions in the last (august) errata, but is easier just remember that the average damage is level+8

Sounds sensible -so the Hill Giant (level 13 brute) should be doing an average of 26 damage with his greatclub (instead of the 10.5 average in MM1). That seems a little more sensible

 

[BlackTiger]

Regarding that 3-20 crits junk in 3E -

You're speaking from Sword and Fist there, which had plenty of other problems, mostly fixed in 3.5 when those things stopped stacking.

 

[eamon]

Sounds sensible -so the Hill Giant (level 13 brute) should be doing an average of 26 damage with his greatclub (instead of the 10.5 average in MM1). That seems a little more sensible

Actually, the Hill Giant along with most problematic brutes was errata'd almost right off the bat to bring damage in line with DMG1 expectations. For the Hill Giant that meant dealing 18 average damage - still less than MM3 guidelines, but not as wimpy as 10.5...

 

[DracoSuave]

While I don't consider this a problem, I do personally give all monsters the high critical weapon property for +1d10 at heroic, +2d10 at paragon and +3d10 at epic.

The goal being to give creatures like minions that extra potential unknown factor that helps keep players on their toes and lessen meta-game tactics. I'd follow the same rules as the PC, but it scales a little too much that a battle can be made swingy rather quickly with a couple of +6d10 crits.

Except then it becomes more valuable for players to save their interrupty attack-disenablers for that crit that comes rather than a normal hit, because the damage prevented is so much higher...

...it just changes the 'meta-gaming' from one thing to another.

Hell 'meta-gaming' is an over-used word... I don't think the word means what you think it means. 'meta-gaming' is not the same word as 'cheating'. Using player knowledge out of turn is not a meta-game decision, it's bad character-play. Knowing that the DM prefers to run Eberron as a series of detective stories, and making fantasy-noir pastiche characters to fit in that is -good- gaming, but it is definately meta-gaming.

Meta-gaming is simply playing the game outside the game... that includes such concepts as 'making a well-synergized party' and 'paying attention to latest rulings' and even 'putting 18 in your main stat.' None of these things are indicative nor exclusive of bad character play.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It has occurred to me recently, that one of the problem that faces high level monsters vis a vis high level PCs comes down to the 'monster crit' problem.

Specifically, even though monsters have a built in number to match their assumed equivalent to magic item power, they lack the ability to do additional dice damage on a critical hit.

That's not a bug, it's a feature. 4e made monsters different from PCs. Monsters have more hps, PC have surges. Monsters have nastier basic attacks, PCs have nastier crits. Monsters have Auras, PCs have stances.

The fact that monster crits aren't too horrible means that a monster crit doesn't whipe out a PC or change a battle. PC crits, OTOH, just let the guy who crit have an extra moment of spotlight time.