D&D 5E What if healing spells only created Temp HP?

[dave2008]

No, not terribly, which is why if I implemented such a rule I would probably just have it directly remove CON, and when CON = 0, you are dead (or dying). It would be also doubly dangerous because as your CON is reduced, your max HP would suffer accordingly. Personally, I don't mind this because I like very lethal and harsh survival games, but it won't appeal to many IMO.

That would be to complex for me. Having to recalculate total HP every time Con goes down, and adjusting any modifiers accordingly doesn't appeal to me. It also means someone with a high Con score is likely to survive a crit, which I don't like. In our system, Crit = death (usually) if you're not wearing armor. We like lethal too

 

[DND_Reborn]

That would be to complex for me. Having to recalculate total HP every time Con goes down, and adjusting any modifiers accordingly doesn't appeal to me. It also means someone with a high Con score is likely to survive a crit, which I don't like. In our system, Crit = death (usually) if you're not wearing armor. We like lethal too

It is, which is why I've never implemented it. But I still like the idea.

The only issue I have with crit = death rules is crits are too common at the 1 in 20 default.

 

[dave2008]

The only issue I have with crit = death rules is crits are too common at the 1 in 20 default.

We mitigate that somewhat with our Armor DR rules; however, it still ended up being to much for my players and we switched to using the old "confirmed critical" rules from prior editions. I have thought about using a +10 system for Crits like PF2e, but that just means you have more crits! Maybe if we switched to 2d10 instead of d20. We've toyed around with the idea, but never implemented it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

We mitigate that somewhat with our Armor DR rules; however, it still ended up being to much for my players and we switched to using the old "confirmed critical" rules from prior editions. I have thought about using a +10 system for Crits like PF2e, but that just means you have more crits! Maybe if we switched to 2d10 instead of d20. We've toyed around with the idea, but never implemented it.

I've been thinking about adding DR for armor on crits only if we decide to have damage go directly to CON, so I understand how it helps with your system.

Our current critical hit rule is that instead of double damage, it allows you an extra attack. If you use that attack against the same creature, it is with advantage. If you get another crit, the attacks just keep coming.

Frankly, we've been using this rule for about 6 months and no one wants to return to double damage. We find this much more versatile and interesting and you never "waste" damage because the target you just critted only had 2 hp left. The down side is things like Smite and SA dice are used for each separate attack. I like this as a feature, not a bug, because I hated it when our Paladin in prior games rolled a crit and always maxed out the smite.... It helps keep things a bit more reigned in, so to say.

 

[dave2008]

..., because I hated it when our Paladin in prior games rolled a crit and always maxed out the smite....

Just to be clear, that is a house rule correct? Default is just rolling extra dice, not max dice (that was 4e).

FYI, if you go with the Con option on a crit you might try what we do: the normal damage goes to HP, only the bonus crit damage goes to CON (or BHP in our case), unless HP are 0, then everything goes to CON. Honestly that also prevents crit = death too.

 

[dave2008]

Our current critical hit rule is that instead of double damage, it allows you an extra attack. If you use that attack against the same creature, it is with advantage. If you get another crit, the attacks just keep coming.

I'm not fan of progressive attacks like this. I have a hard enough time accepting a 3 (6 with action surge) attacks in single round with our fighters as it is. I prefer fewer, harder hits. But I am glad it is working for you and your group. Everyone is different.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Just to be clear, that is a house rule correct? Default is just rolling extra dice, not max dice (that was 4e).

No, it isn't a house rule. I mean he would always spend whatever his highest level slot was since all the smite dice got double on the crit as well.

I'm not fan of progressive attacks like this. I have a hard enough time accepting a 3 (6 with action surge) attacks in single round with our fighters as it is. I prefer fewer, harder hits. But I am glad it is working for you and your group. Everyone is different.

Yeah, we like it. Mostly because it gives you more options. I should clarify when I say an additional attack, it does not need to be with the same weapon or even against the same target. Your PC might grab their handaxe and toss it at a different foe, especially if the original hit did enough damage to kill the target.

For example, suppose your Sorcerer Firebolted an ogre and got a critical hit. You can:
A. Firebolt the ogre again (only counts as one casting, not two).
B. Firebolt a completely different target.
C. Cast an entirely different cantrip at another target.

Given this only comes up 1 in 20 rolls, it really isn't a lot of extra rolling and thematically it adds to the game, strategically as well.

But, to each their own, of course.

 

[dave2008]

No, it isn't a house rule. I mean he would always spend whatever his highest level slot was since all the smite dice got double on the crit as well.

When you said "maxed out," I took it to mean you allowed the crit to do max damage, like 4e, + rolled damage. Which I know some people on these forums do. That was my mistake in reading comprehension.

Yeah, we like it. Mostly because it gives you more options. I should clarify when I say an additional attack, it does not need to be with the same weapon or even against the same target. Your PC might grab their handaxe and toss it at a different foe, especially if the original hit did enough damage to kill the target.

For example, suppose your Sorcerer Firebolted an ogre and got a critical hit. You can:
A. Firebolt the ogre again (only counts as one casting, not two).
B. Firebolt a completely different target.
C. Cast an entirely different cantrip at another target.

Given this only comes up 1 in 20 rolls, it really isn't a lot of extra rolling and thematically it adds to the game, strategically as well.

Honestly, I like that even less, but,,,

But, to each their own, of course.

exactly!

To clarify, I don't like being able to do so much in 6 seconds. Old school 1-minute rounds sure, but 6 seconds just doesn't feel right to me and would detract from the grittier theme of our games.

Also, with regard to over damage (more damage then needed to finish off the last 2 HP), I've been giving thematic descriptions and situational boons. So if the fighter crits on an orc with 2 HP (BHP for us), then I described the fighter cleaving the orc in two and I might have the remaining orcs make a Wis save or be frightened. I've found this to be more interesting than just doing extra damage, but generally only save it for the dramatic death blows.

 

[DND_Reborn]

To clarify, I don't like being able to do so much in 6 seconds. Old school 1-minute rounds sure, but 6 seconds just doesn't feel right to me and would detract from the grittier theme of our games.

FWIW, D&D should default to 20-second rounds if they are going to insist on a d20.

Actually, we don't follow the 6-second round much. A round is just "however long it takes for everyone to complete their actions" for us, so getting in "free attacks" on a crit isn't a big deal. Spells that last "1 minute" is just "10 rounds" in our game.