Critical Dice Argument [Archive] - Wizards Community

Critical Dice Argument [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
SolkaTruesilver
09-01-06, 05:41 PM When you succeed a critical hit with, for example, a Greataxe. Do you roll 3d12 + strenghtx3, or do you roll 1d12+ str and THEN multiply the result by 3?

As pointless it appears, the argument cropped in my recent game. I am on the side of "It doesn'T change much, I prefer to roll 3 dices" while some others INSIST that the rules says "roll one dice and multiply by 3"

I need help on:

- The RAW (didn't took the time to look them up)
- Possible game consequences for either choosing (less randomness with 3dices?)
- Anything like that you crossed in your RPGmer life
IbanezNinja
09-01-06, 05:51 PM I need help on:

- The RAW (didn't took the time to look them up)
- Possible game consequences for either choosing (less randomness with 3dices?)
- Anything like that you crossed in your RPGmer life

Well the raw is you roll the dice three times. If you chose the other way, one lucky roll makes the critical that much worse and more randomness always favors monsters over players. So I say keep it the way it is, unless your players are REALLY set in wanting to times the die roll by 3. It really shouldn't change too much, but you might have a random unlucky pk, at which time your players would probably regret the rule change.
Sikyanakotik
09-01-06, 07:02 PM Acually, the RAW says to roll then multiply, but from what I can tell, most people do it the other way anyways. I guess it's just a bit more visceral to roll every die of damage you deal.
aotrscommander
09-01-06, 07:21 PM Irrespective of what the RAW says, we have always rolled and multiplied up. We, bunch of munchkins that we are, find it much more satisifying!

According to the RAW (the glossary entry) in both the latter 3.0 printing and 3.5, you are supposed to roll damage twice (etc). I have a feeling it might have been phrased differently in the first printing of 3.0, but I no longer have my original copy of 3.0.
StevenO
09-01-06, 10:56 PM You multiply the base number of dice you roll and any bonus damage but NOT any bonus dice like sneak attack.

Straight multiplication provides too much swing in damage amounts. How good is a Great Axe critical for a player if it does less damage than an average swing. If struck by a Great Axe crit while at 27 hp which would you prefer, almost always going down to 7 or 8 or dying 1/3 of the time?
AT-AT Assault
09-01-06, 10:59 PM Irrespective of what the RAW says, we have always rolled and multiplied up. We, bunch of munchkins that we are, find it much more satisifying!

According to the RAW (the glossary entry) in both the latter 3.0 printing and 3.5, you are supposed to roll damage twice (etc). I have a feeling it might have been phrased differently in the first printing of 3.0, but I no longer have my original copy of 3.0.I actually just read the section of multiplying damage dice in 3.0 the other day. It says to roll your dice as many times as the multiplier (so x2 means roll twice, x3 means roll three times, etc). Just throwing this out there in case the OP doesnt know, bonus damage dice (such as those from sneak attack, or a flaming sword) are never rolled multiple times.
SolkaTruesilver
09-02-06, 01:25 AM except if you have a flaming burst weapon, which deliver 1d10 fire damage bonus on a critical, 2d10 if it's x3, etc...

I know my abc ;)

So, 3.5 RAW says 3d12 + (otherx3) + (other nonmulti). The "dice times 3" are gonna hear me next game. They just bringed the topic back every time they had the occasion.
aotrscommander
09-02-06, 08:16 AM I actually just read the section of multiplying damage dice in 3.0 the other day. It says to roll your dice as many times as the multiplier (so x2 means roll twice, x3 means roll three times, etc). Just throwing this out there in case the OP doesnt know, bonus damage dice (such as those from sneak attack, or a flaming sword) are never rolled multiple times.

Is yours a first printing 3.0 or a later one? I know there were a fair few changes between my first and my sister's later version.
Nom
09-02-06, 08:25 AM Was it really so hard to read "multiplying damage" on PH pg 134, which explicitly says "roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results"?

The main issue with rolling once is that you flatten the distribution. Your chance of rolling 3 or 36 on 3d12 is 1 in 12^3 each; the total will tend towards the average of 19.5. Your chance of rolling 3 or 36 on (1d12)x3 is 1/12 each; all of the 12 possible results have the same likelihood.
aotrscommander
09-02-06, 10:19 AM Was it really so hard to read "multiplying damage" on PH pg 134, which explicitly says "roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results"?

No, but it ws faster to just look in the glossary. The index/glossary are I think one of the better aspects of the rules, and I wish they'd put one in every book!

I mentioned only the eariler edition, as I seem to recall at time of release reading it as one dice multiplied (which we use anyway; I should point out we don't use Death from Massive Damge though). I couldn't check it up in my original copy. I may well be wrong (and probablt am by the sound of it)

The main issue with rolling once is that you flatten the distribution. Your chance of rolling 3 or 36 on 3d12 is 1 in 12^3 each; the total will tend towards the average of 19.5. Your chance of rolling 3 or 36 on (1d12)x3 is 1/12 each; all of the 12 possible results have the same likelihood.

Yeah, I know. It's just more fun to watch the Bard/Fighter roll so many crits and then roll 1 or 2 to the point where the limp-wristed 'Strike of Verin' becomes legend, or the meaty Greataxe weilder whacks out sixty odd damage, or the BBEG whack the Dwarf Ranger who's been getting cocky for 40 odd-damage with an AoO.

'Course, we're veterans of Rolemaster, and you don't get more extreme daftness than that.
Nom
09-02-06, 11:10 PM No, but it ws faster to just look in the glossary.True. But you weren't the one who had an extensive argument which could have been easily solved by looking up either "critical hit" in the glossary or "damage, multiplying" in the index. Further, you weren't the one who asked for the RAW position with the excuse "I didn't take time to look it up". It amazes me that some people are willing to take the effort to argue about a rule and ask for 3rd party clarification but are unwilling of taking a simple trip to the index.
The index/glossary are I think one of the better aspects of the rules, and I wish they'd put one in every book!Totally agree. The PH and DMG indexes are invaluable. In fact, I wish that there was some way to test that people know how to use the index before letting them post rule questions on the board.
aotrscommander
09-03-06, 11:06 AM In fact, I wish that there was some way to test that people know how to use the index before letting them post rule questions on the board.

I hear you. I'd sort of missed that bit...

While we're at it, maybe we could, you know, have some sort of exam so that only people that have real Intelligence/Wisdom/Charisma of 12 or higher are allowed to play D&D...just so they can't cheat and play characters smarter/wiser/more charismatic than they are or something...

Nah. Nobody would ever do that, would they? That'd be just silly.
Fromost the Grimm
09-03-06, 05:34 PM Come on, *everyone* knows that when you score a Critical Hit with a Greataxe, something's head should come off.

That's *so* what happens in the movies . . .

. . . if not, then you need a bigger Greataxe.

Simple, really.
Gellion
09-03-06, 05:53 PM In my group we acually just multiply the damage by he crit modifier. We even include the damage from Sneak Attack or a Flaming Sword in the crit damage. It has worked for us so far.:)
SolkaTruesilver
09-03-06, 07:08 PM True. But you weren't the one who had an extensive argument which could have been easily solved by looking up either "critical hit" in the glossary or "damage, multiplying" in the index. Further, you weren't the one who asked for the RAW position with the excuse "I didn't take time to look it up". It amazes me that some people are willing to take the effort to argue about a rule and ask for 3rd party clarification but are unwilling of taking a simple trip to the index.

Actually, it was I who asked for the RAW position with the lame excuse. It just that I didnt had the opportunity to check them. Not everyone carry their PHB around, ye know.

anyway, thanks for the help every1
Nom
09-03-06, 09:21 PM Actually, it was I who asked for the RAW position with the lame excuse. It just that I didnt had the opportunity to check them. Not everyone carry their PHB around, ye know.:)

If you'd said "I couldn't find it" I wouldn't have ragged on you. But your intro said that you were having the argument "during the game", which was why I wondered why no-one went to either the glossary or the definitive rules on multiplying damage. I'm sure you didn't mean to say "we had a 20 minute argument about the rules during which time no-one bothered to actually look them up", but it sure could be read that way. :P
anyway, thanks for the help every1No problems. It's worth figuring out how the index is organised and getting used to using that and the glossary as a first stop. About a third of the rules questions on the boards could be answered in two minutes with a quick visit to the index.

Another third are in the FAQ, which leaves the remaining third as boards-worthy questions. But sometimes you can't find the answer in the indexes or FAQ even though you've looked, and thus you won't know until you ask. :)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
SolkaTruesilver 09-01-06, 05:41 PM	When you succeed a critical hit with, for example, a Greataxe. Do you roll 3d12 + strenghtx3, or do you roll 1d12+ str and THEN multiply the result by 3? As pointless it appears, the argument cropped in my recent game. I am on the side of "It doesn'T change much, I prefer to roll 3 dices" while some others INSIST that the rules says "roll one dice and multiply by 3" I need help on: - The RAW (didn't took the time to look them up) - Possible game consequences for either choosing (less randomness with 3dices?) - Anything like that you crossed in your RPGmer life
IbanezNinja 09-01-06, 05:51 PM	I need help on: - The RAW (didn't took the time to look them up) - Possible game consequences for either choosing (less randomness with 3dices?) - Anything like that you crossed in your RPGmer life Well the raw is you roll the dice three times. If you chose the other way, one lucky roll makes the critical that much worse and more randomness always favors monsters over players. So I say keep it the way it is, unless your players are REALLY set in wanting to times the die roll by 3. It really shouldn't change too much, but you might have a random unlucky pk, at which time your players would probably regret the rule change.
Sikyanakotik 09-01-06, 07:02 PM	Acually, the RAW says to roll then multiply, but from what I can tell, most people do it the other way anyways. I guess it's just a bit more visceral to roll every die of damage you deal.
aotrscommander 09-01-06, 07:21 PM	Irrespective of what the RAW says, we have always rolled and multiplied up. We, bunch of munchkins that we are, find it much more satisifying! According to the RAW (the glossary entry) in both the latter 3.0 printing and 3.5, you are supposed to roll damage twice (etc). I have a feeling it might have been phrased differently in the first printing of 3.0, but I no longer have my original copy of 3.0.
StevenO 09-01-06, 10:56 PM	You multiply the base number of dice you roll and any bonus damage but NOT any bonus dice like sneak attack. Straight multiplication provides too much swing in damage amounts. How good is a Great Axe critical for a player if it does less damage than an average swing. If struck by a Great Axe crit while at 27 hp which would you prefer, almost always going down to 7 or 8 or dying 1/3 of the time?
AT-AT Assault 09-01-06, 10:59 PM	Irrespective of what the RAW says, we have always rolled and multiplied up. We, bunch of munchkins that we are, find it much more satisifying! According to the RAW (the glossary entry) in both the latter 3.0 printing and 3.5, you are supposed to roll damage twice (etc). I have a feeling it might have been phrased differently in the first printing of 3.0, but I no longer have my original copy of 3.0.I actually just read the section of multiplying damage dice in 3.0 the other day. It says to roll your dice as many times as the multiplier (so x2 means roll twice, x3 means roll three times, etc). Just throwing this out there in case the OP doesnt know, bonus damage dice (such as those from sneak attack, or a flaming sword) are never rolled multiple times.
SolkaTruesilver 09-02-06, 01:25 AM	except if you have a flaming burst weapon, which deliver 1d10 fire damage bonus on a critical, 2d10 if it's x3, etc... I know my abc ;) So, 3.5 RAW says 3d12 + (otherx3) + (other nonmulti). The "dice times 3" are gonna hear me next game. They just bringed the topic back every time they had the occasion.
aotrscommander 09-02-06, 08:16 AM	I actually just read the section of multiplying damage dice in 3.0 the other day. It says to roll your dice as many times as the multiplier (so x2 means roll twice, x3 means roll three times, etc). Just throwing this out there in case the OP doesnt know, bonus damage dice (such as those from sneak attack, or a flaming sword) are never rolled multiple times. Is yours a first printing 3.0 or a later one? I know there were a fair few changes between my first and my sister's later version.
Nom 09-02-06, 08:25 AM	Was it really so hard to read "multiplying damage" on PH pg 134, which explicitly says "roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results"? The main issue with rolling once is that you flatten the distribution. Your chance of rolling 3 or 36 on 3d12 is 1 in 12^3 each; the total will tend towards the average of 19.5. Your chance of rolling 3 or 36 on (1d12)x3 is 1/12 each; all of the 12 possible results have the same likelihood.
aotrscommander 09-02-06, 10:19 AM	Was it really so hard to read "multiplying damage" on PH pg 134, which explicitly says "roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results"? No, but it ws faster to just look in the glossary. The index/glossary are I think one of the better aspects of the rules, and I wish they'd put one in every book! I mentioned only the eariler edition, as I seem to recall at time of release reading it as one dice multiplied (which we use anyway; I should point out we don't use Death from Massive Damge though). I couldn't check it up in my original copy. I may well be wrong (and probablt am by the sound of it) The main issue with rolling once is that you flatten the distribution. Your chance of rolling 3 or 36 on 3d12 is 1 in 12^3 each; the total will tend towards the average of 19.5. Your chance of rolling 3 or 36 on (1d12)x3 is 1/12 each; all of the 12 possible results have the same likelihood. Yeah, I know. It's just more fun to watch the Bard/Fighter roll so many crits and then roll 1 or 2 to the point where the limp-wristed 'Strike of Verin' becomes legend, or the meaty Greataxe weilder whacks out sixty odd damage, or the BBEG whack the Dwarf Ranger who's been getting cocky for 40 odd-damage with an AoO. 'Course, we're veterans of Rolemaster, and you don't get more extreme daftness than that.
Nom 09-02-06, 11:10 PM	No, but it ws faster to just look in the glossary.True. But you weren't the one who had an extensive argument which could have been easily solved by looking up either "critical hit" in the glossary or "damage, multiplying" in the index. Further, you weren't the one who asked for the RAW position with the excuse "I didn't take time to look it up". It amazes me that some people are willing to take the effort to argue about a rule and ask for 3rd party clarification but are unwilling of taking a simple trip to the index. The index/glossary are I think one of the better aspects of the rules, and I wish they'd put one in every book!Totally agree. The PH and DMG indexes are invaluable. In fact, I wish that there was some way to test that people know how to use the index before letting them post rule questions on the board.
aotrscommander 09-03-06, 11:06 AM	In fact, I wish that there was some way to test that people know how to use the index before letting them post rule questions on the board. I hear you. I'd sort of missed that bit... While we're at it, maybe we could, you know, have some sort of exam so that only people that have real Intelligence/Wisdom/Charisma of 12 or higher are allowed to play D&D...just so they can't cheat and play characters smarter/wiser/more charismatic than they are or something... Nah. Nobody would ever do that, would they? That'd be just silly.
Fromost the Grimm 09-03-06, 05:34 PM	Come on, everyone knows that when you score a Critical Hit with a Greataxe, something's head should come off. That's so what happens in the movies . . . . . . if not, then you need a bigger Greataxe. Simple, really.
Gellion 09-03-06, 05:53 PM	In my group we acually just multiply the damage by he crit modifier. We even include the damage from Sneak Attack or a Flaming Sword in the crit damage. It has worked for us so far.:)
SolkaTruesilver 09-03-06, 07:08 PM	True. But you weren't the one who had an extensive argument which could have been easily solved by looking up either "critical hit" in the glossary or "damage, multiplying" in the index. Further, you weren't the one who asked for the RAW position with the excuse "I didn't take time to look it up". It amazes me that some people are willing to take the effort to argue about a rule and ask for 3rd party clarification but are unwilling of taking a simple trip to the index. Actually, it was I who asked for the RAW position with the lame excuse. It just that I didnt had the opportunity to check them. Not everyone carry their PHB around, ye know. anyway, thanks for the help every1
Nom 09-03-06, 09:21 PM	Actually, it was I who asked for the RAW position with the lame excuse. It just that I didnt had the opportunity to check them. Not everyone carry their PHB around, ye know.:) If you'd said "I couldn't find it" I wouldn't have ragged on you. But your intro said that you were having the argument "during the game", which was why I wondered why no-one went to either the glossary or the definitive rules on multiplying damage. I'm sure you didn't mean to say "we had a 20 minute argument about the rules during which time no-one bothered to actually look them up", but it sure could be read that way. :P anyway, thanks for the help every1No problems. It's worth figuring out how the index is organised and getting used to using that and the glossary as a first stop. About a third of the rules questions on the boards could be answered in two minutes with a quick visit to the index. Another third are in the FAQ, which leaves the remaining third as boards-worthy questions. But sometimes you can't find the answer in the indexes or FAQ even though you've looked, and thus you won't know until you ask. :)