Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jack Daniel 05-24-05, 11:43 AM	For characters with strength scores below 25 or so, the rapier and the scimitar lag way behind the longsword and the battleaxe in average damage per round (a problem only made worse when v3.5 declared that keen and Improved Critical no longer stack), in spite of the fact that these are all one-handed martial weapons and ought to be about even. The simple fact is, damage die is better than threat range, particularly given the fact that iterative attacks (which have lower attack bonuses and make it harder to confirm critical hits) heavily favor low-threat, high-damage weapons. So here's an idea for yeat another house rule: a confirming critical roll that ignores both attack bonuses and armor classes. In effect, it levels the playing field between attack rolls, regardless of whether the attack was primary and took no penalty, or quaternary and came at -15 to hit. The critical roll is a simple ability check vs. DC 10, just like the fumble roll. If you're attacking with a melee weapon, a strength check is used. With a ranged weapon or a finesse weapon, the check is dexterity. Success means a critical hit (and although it's not the usual rule for ability checks, in this case a natural 1 is always a failure and a natural 20 is always a success.) Overall, critical hits will be confirmed just about as often as they are now on primary attacks; but iterative or secondary attacks now have the same chance. An analog to this rule is the one I use for critical fumbles: a natural 1 turned up on an attack roll forces a Dex check vs. DC 10, and failure results in a critical fumble. Rather than dropping your weapon (which is a pretty silly thing to have happen every time you roll a natural 1 and fail a Dex check), a critical fumble makes you flat-footed until your next action, and you're only able to take a move action or a standard action on your next turn, just like the first round of combat. This fumble rule is quite a bit easier to justify -- you either overextended yourself and threw yourself off-balance with a melee or thrown attack; or let the kickback of your bow or rifle unbalance you for a few seconds.
Lord of the Underdark 05-24-05, 11:54 AM	Seems like it makes sense, I'd play-test it first.
Xamatus 05-24-05, 01:33 PM	Hello!!! Since you were talking about critical hits I thought I could pop in with one simple question. I have problem with my PC-s (I'm DM) about instant kill. They want me to use it in the game. I, personaly, think it is stupid thing, first because they will die more often (because monsters will have instant kill too). Second, how can one tiny little fighter (of lvl 13) kill one BIG dragon (young adult red) with one hit. That is not fair... :confused: Thanks :D
Jack Daniel 05-24-05, 01:43 PM	Actually, I have used instant kills in my game before, and while it does make things deadlier for the PCs, it really doesn't come up all that often. Think about it: the chance of rolling two natural 20s in a row and then confirming the instant kill roll is about 1 in 800. It won't happen often. It can be used, though to great dramatic effect. If you don't want a PC to be instant-killed in a given situation... just keep the d20 behind your DM screen and don't tell the players! On the other hand, when the players make such a roll, it can be pretty awesome. In the campaign I just finished, we had only one instant kill come up over the course of the whole entire game... and it happened when the party beat a troupe of dark elves, and the last survivor fled out a window. The party monk leapt out after him, slow-fell down to the ground, and rolled two consecutive natural 20s on his unarmed attack roll. One more roll proved to be a hit, and he killed the fleeing drow in one shot. As DM, I never got so lucky as to roll a natural 20 on any confirming critical roll against a PC (and if I had, I doubt I would've fudged it, unless the kill-shot would have been stupid or meaningless). And even BIG dragons have weak spots and vital organs. You only need one good shot to kill ANYTHING with an anatomy.
Xamatus 05-24-05, 01:56 PM	You make a good point. I'll use it. After all if they accept higher chance to die it's their problem. They have cleric with resurection... :D Thanks!!!
jaerad 05-25-05, 04:07 AM	Interesting idea, Jack. Like Lord Underdark said: needs playtesting. Post again if it works out really good...
Thelon Fairblade 05-25-05, 09:22 AM	Jack, regarding your Crit/Fumble proposal: It seems like critical hits will happen more often this way... now any threat has a mogre-than-50% chance of confirming as a critical, even if you needed a "20" to hit the target in the first place. (Dc 10 = 55% success, w/o ability bonuses) As for fumbles, how do you not have a critical fumble? Either you make the DEX check and don't fumble at all, or you fail and get a critical fumble. Where's the middle ground? IMC, I spur-of-the-moment decide the results of fumbles. Make the DEX check = lose further actions this turn. Fail the DEX check, do anything from draw AoOs from those who threaten, or grant opponents a +2 on their attack next turn, or drop weapon, or fall down. "Critical Fumble" is reserved for a "1" on the dex-check, and at the very least will result in 2 of the above....