Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bowmore 02-10-07, 08:16 PM	I'm thinking of introducing a variant for critical hits in my next campaign, but I need to hash out the idea first. The inspiration for this idea came from Final Fantasy XII, where I noticed some weapons (bows, guns) could critical hit for extra damage, while melee weapons had a small chance of starting a combo -- that is, performing many attacks in a row (sometimes up to five... yikes). I'm not trying to exactly duplicate that system, but I think a system like it would be an interesting twist on critical hits. I would implement it by making it an optional "critical method" that characters can choose from at character creation, and change when they level up. I'm at a loss for how to work out the mechanics, though. Some weapons are more suited for combination attacks than others, particularly weapons with curved blades... these same weapons also tend to have larger critical threat ranges as well. One way I could do this is change it so when you roll a critical threat, you get an extra attack at the same bonus. This roll doesn't require confirmation, it's just an extra attack. If you roll a critical threat on one of these extra attacks, you get another extra attack, and so on... but I'm not sure how I should set the maximum number of extra attacks. Any suggestions?
Galstaf, Sorcerer of Lite 02-10-07, 08:50 PM	In a lot of ways, the "bones" of the existing critical system are very similar to what you're trying to do. Roll a threat, make another attack. If only the first (crit) roll is a hit, you do damage once. If both rolls (crit and confirmation) are hits, then you do damage twice. It's really just the way it's described that's different. Where you start to see mechanical differences are when you add more rules than just the basics: Your system would make axes, scythes, and other weapons with a big crit multiplier much less desirable, since in order for a battleaxe to do triple damage in your system, it would take three successful attack rolls (and not one but two of them would have to be critical!), as opposed to two in the standard rules (one to crit and one to confirm). However, your system greatly increases the damage potential of any build that relies on precision damage like sneak attack, insightful strike, etc. Normally these numbers are only factored into an attack once, but when a crit means getting a whole new actual attack instead of a "simulated" one, precision damage can once again be applied, provided all the same conditions are met (and almost every time, they will be, since nothing else is likely to have happened in the interim between the crit and the follow-up). Same thing applies to flaming weapons and the like. You'd be seeing the extra d6 of fire damage applied multiple times instead of just once. Another thing to consider is that this variant gives combatants a lot more versatility when it comes to crits -- You could crit and follow it up with a disarm or trip attempt instead of another normal attack, doing normal damage but getting a free special maneuver out of the deal (and possibly another attack after that if you have something like Improved Trip). Not necessarily a good or a bad thing, but something to think about.
Bowmore 02-11-07, 12:24 AM	It would make low threat range / high multiplier weapons less desirable to use, but keep in mind that if I do introduce this (which I probably won't) it'd be an optional thing... not everyone would have to use it at all. Thanks for the feedback, by the way -- the implications of extra damage from sneak attack or magic weapons is pushing me towards just scrapping it.
Galstaf, Sorcerer of Lite 02-11-07, 07:39 AM	I ran some numbers while bored at work... It gets pretty scary if you combine the multiple sneak attacks with a large crit range, like the rapier your average rogue is likely to be carrying. Chances of following a crit with another crit (assuming all natural rolls within the crit range are high enough to hit the target's AC), by range: 20: 1 in 400 19-20: 1 in 100 18-20: 1 in 44.444... Improved Critical or the keen special ability only make it worse: 17-20: 1 in 25 15-20: 1 in 11.111... And that's assuming a single attack. Iterative attacks make the discrepancy even more apparent. The system is a pretty good idea, but the numbers will need some serious work in order to keep it from getting really abusive in the wrong hands.
Bob Loblaw 02-11-07, 09:13 AM	YOu could just do this with flavor rather than rules. Why not assume that the character achieved additional attacks based on the critical multiplier -1? A long sword that critically hit allowed for one additional attack that succeeded while a scythe allowed for 3 additional attacks that all succeeded. I know it's not exactly what you were looking for, but it would eliminate the need for additional mechanics the majority of the time (at least for melee).
Mitsukai_sama 02-12-07, 08:29 PM	It may be worth mentioning that the Lightning Mace [Style] feat (Complete Warrior) already does this, while still allowing critical hits to occur as normal.
Bavix 02-13-07, 01:31 PM	I've been thinking about making critical hits occur if the attacker rolls 10 or more than the defender's AC. With this rule a confirmation roll wouldn't be needed but I would almost certainly have to let characters use their BAB as an AC bonus as well. Another issue I thought of would be ranged touch attacks. I would have to rule that a ranged touch attack would do damage as usual upon hitting an opponent's touch AC but could only critical if the attack roll was 10 or more above the defender's normal AC. It's a tricky and dangerous proposition but for some reason I like the idea of it.