How easy are critical hits in PF2? I'd be pretty frustrated if the success of an action depended on an occurrence with a likelihood of 5-10%!
D&D 5E Too Few Player Options During Combat?
jmartkdr2
Hero
A crit happens when you beat the AC (or DC) by 10. So if the target's AC is 16, you crit if you roll a 26 or better after mods.
For a fighter against on-level opponents and no situational mods, that should be a natural 16 or better (ie a 16+ on the die.), but fighters are better than most other martials at hitting - most other people will need a natural 18+ to criut vs. on-level opponents. There's a lot of situational mods available in either direction, so with teamwork you can bring the odds up a lot. If the monsters are working as a team, things can get very hard very fast.
Justice and Rule
Hero
Also worth noting that rolling a Natural 20 increases the level of success by one, and Natural 1 lowers the level of success by one. So most of the time a 20 is also a critical hit, but there are instances (like if a 20 would normally fail) where it only turns into a hit. The same with a natural one in the opposite direction, though there are things that key off critical failures rather than the GM just making things up.
It's a mechanic that is built into attacks and classes. There are spells where a critical success and a critical failure will add on new conditions (or subtract them), for example, or that the Fighter's math is built around them having a better chance to hit than most classes against the monster math, which also ends up meaning that they are more likely to critically hit.
jmartkdr2
Hero
To add: the best part is that it's built in to all attacks, all saving throws, and all skill checks, so you almost never have binary pass/fail rolls. It's a huge strength of the system.
Justice and Rule
Hero
Oh, definitely. It does great for breaking up spell effects so that "save-vs-suck" is less because of the spell and more because the caster outclasses you.
dave2008
Legend
and a huge burden
OK, so all cards on the table, I'm not a big fan of what I've seen of PF2. It's just way too fidly for my tastes (and in mostly the wrong ways - for me).
But one thing I do find interesting is the mechanics of: success, big success +, minor failure, failure, epic failure etc.
So why a huge burden? Is it just too much to keep track of in addition to everything else? Too swingy? Something else?
It actually seems to be one of the less fiddly things I've seen of the system.
Justice and Rule
Hero
In practice, it really isn't? In fact, creating the gradations in results helps avoid having certain spells and/or techniques completely dominating combat.
For example, Hold spell in 5E is a big wildcard because it can do so much based on a simple pass/fail: if you fail, even by one, you could potentially be locked up for multiple turns. And if the creature passes, then nothing happens and you've wasted the spell.
Meanwhile, Paralyze has 4 levels of success/failure: a crit means there are no ill effects, a mere success means that you lose an action (not completely debilitating, but it can be a real loss), a regular failure means you're paralyzed for a round, and a critical failure means you are locked up for potentially 4 rounds, with a save at the of each one until the effect is done. Not only does this mean that you get a little bit out of the spell even if you miss with it, but if you just fail you're only out for a round. So you are more likely to get something, but less likely to get the sort of multi-round game-changer that Hold generally is.
dave2008
Legend
As designer, I love the idea. But in practice, much like ongoing damage and conditions, it is just not something I keep track of well during the chaos of combat. Conceptually I love it, practically I don't care for it.
dave2008
Legend
That can be true for you and it can be false for me. I know myself.
As I mentioned in my post above, I love the idea - it just doesn't work well for me in reality. For those it works for - it is great. For me it is a burden.
