Houserule Idea for crits [Archive] - Wizards Community

Houserule Idea for crits [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
starfire311
01-17-05, 12:25 PM This houserule may fall into the catagory of fixing something that ain't broke.

A few days ago me and a few of my friends were talking about the crit mutliplier and how it was odd that a Battle axe can do a x3 crit but has no chance of dealing double damage... Then I brought up the statisticall anomylly that you are more likely to do 8 or 10 points of damage with a scythe than you are to deal 9. This really seems odd to us. So I came with up the idea of if you threaten a crit with a weapon that you need to roll a confirmation for each additional multiplier. so say you get a 20 with a battle axe you would actually roll 2 confirmation rolls and if you only confirmed one then you would deal double damage, if you confirmed both then it would be triple damage. Same thing with a scythe but you would roll 3 confirmation rolls.

What do you guys think about this. If I crunched the numbers right, this method is statistically equal to the normal method, but provides a little more variablity.
Xeviat-DM
01-17-05, 12:41 PM It sounds like it would make high range low multiplier weapons more valuable than low range high multiplier weapons.

When you roll critical damage, do you multiply what is rolled or do you roll extra dice?
starfire311
01-17-05, 02:32 PM It sounds like it would make high range low multiplier weapons more valuable than low range high multiplier weapons.

I not sure about that.

Take battle axe for instance, it is 20/x3. Under current system if you roll a 20 you threaten a crit and you make another attack to confirm it, if you succeed on the confirmation you do triple damage. if you fail you get single damage

under my system if you roll a 20 you threaten and get to make 2 more attacks for each one that succeeds you do addtional damage. so if both succeed you do triple damage, if one succeeds you do double damage and if both fail you do single damage.

In my system you are less likely to do triple damage and more like to do extra damage assuming a 50% chance of confirming a crit. You would have a 25% chance to do triple damage and a 50% chance to do double damage and a 25% chance to do single damage. under the current system it is 50% chance to do triple damage and 50% chance to do single damage.

When you roll critical damage, do you multiply what is rolled or do you roll extra dice?

we roll extra dice

So a crit with a scythe is 8D4.... thus you are more likely to get a 10 on a crit than a 9. and on any given attack you are much more likely to get 8 damage than to roll a crit and get a 9. That is why a scythe is more likly to do 8 and 10 damage than 9.
Xeviat-DM
01-17-05, 03:02 PM Okay, I see what you mean. So with your idea, the 20/x3, there's a chance the character could do something rather than the critical just failing. I see.

Not sure if I like that though. An axe is unreliable, but when you hit someone with it good, it does a lot of damage. I can't imagine a critical hit with an axe, pick, or scythe doing anything less than a crud load of damage.

But now that you've explained it more, it sounds balanced. Just not my thing.
Gold Katana
01-17-05, 04:25 PM Kind of the obverse of your approach:

We have houseruled that if the confirmation is a natural 20 (despite the weapon's normal crit range), it adds on one extra multiplier if the next roll also confirms. If the third roll is also a nat 20 (hasn't happend yet), continue in this fashion ad nauseum. In this case, a battle axe that threatens, then confirms with a natural 20, then confirms again deals X4 damage.

It has occurred a few times - enough to be interesting but not broken.
HailSpork
01-18-05, 01:06 AM I really really like that.
Kind of interested in how the numbers work out...

As it is, assuming that a 19 hits, a 19-20 weapon is likely to deal an extra 10%*(chance to confirm) damage from a crit; a 20/x3 weapon is likely to deal the same.

With your rule, the 19-20 will be unnafected. However, the 20/x3 becomes... (doing some stats work on the side)

where A is the chance to confirm
.1(2*(1-A)A+2A*A)==.1(2A-2AA+2AA)==.2A; exactly the same expected gain.

Of course, this would not be combinable with any house rules to have a crit confirm roll a crit; that would be ungodly overpowered for a high multiplier item.

Also, Katana: about layering crits, I played in a game where if you rolled a crit threat on the crit confirm, you would roll to confirm again. We also used the addition of crit multipliers so that a "double crit" on a x3 weapon would be x5 (since you're adding x2). This keeps them on par with higher crit range weapons.
I did manage to roll 3 20s in a row with a scythe. 20d4+60 dmg... sounds crazy, but that's 1/8000 (not including the confirm at the end).
Xandore
01-20-05, 06:45 PM I prefer to make as few rolls as possible so the method I use for crits:

When you make a crit threat and hit by 5 or more over what you need to hit you do maximum damage for one roll. A sucessful confirmation roll you then get the additional roll(s). So a x2 weapon when hitting by 5+ and confirmed crit roll would result in maximum damage for the 1st roll plus the result of a second roll.

Regardless of success on the confirmation if you hit by 5+ and meet the crit threat then you do maximum damage from the one roll, thus eliminating the need for that roll.

If you make the threat range and hit by 10+ then you do maximum damage. If you then make a successful confirmation you also do maximum for the second roll. If it was a x3 weapon you would only need to roll one for the 3rd roll.

You continue in this fashion for +15, +20, etc. Though I don't have any weapons in my campaign that is more than x4 multipler.

So in any case you only do maximum damage for one roll unless you confirm the roll. Any hit that is by 0 to +4 over what you need you will just have to roll :weep:
starfire311
01-21-05, 04:16 PM Regardless of success on the confirmation if you hit by 5+ and meet the crit threat then you do maximum damage from the one roll, thus eliminating the need for that roll.

you do realize this amkes weapons with larger threat ranges better than ones with smaller threat ranges... in this system a long sword > Battle Axe and I really wouldn't like that, but hey if you guys like it go for it.

Aside I am already protesting the unfair treatment of the great axe by having my Living greyhawk dwarf wield a great sword. Everyone I meet says that is so undwarfy lol.
Xandore
01-23-05, 12:50 PM you do realize this amkes weapons with larger threat ranges better than ones with smaller threat ranges... in this system a long sword > Battle Axe and I really wouldn't like that, but hey if you guys like it go for it.

Aside I am already protesting the unfair treatment of the great axe by having my Living greyhawk dwarf wield a great sword. Everyone I meet says that is so undwarfy lol.

Don't really see the difference with my method and the normal one. Doesn't matter to me anyways since UA came out I use Vitality/wounds and long sword and battle axe both have 19-20 threat range. Since critical hits don't do more damage just wounds instead of vitality damage. With the vitality/wound system I just make it you make a hit and meet the threat range and hit by 10+ and you do maximum damage to wounds and no further rolls.
Pyrik
02-09-05, 01:32 PM ...long sword and battle axe both have 19-20 threat range. Only if you've changed it.
Battleaxes threaten on a 20, that's why they have a x3 multiplier. Longsword threatens on a 19-20, that's why they only have a x2 multiplier.

Unwieldy weapons are devastating when used effectively, but are harder to use effectively, I think is the general idea. In one game, all the archers wanted to change their bows to 19-20 weapons, but keep the x3. It didn't wash. DM would only increase the threat range by reducing the damage potential.
Xandore
02-09-05, 04:43 PM Don't really see the difference with my method and the normal one. Doesn't matter to me anyways since UA came out I use Vitality/wounds and long sword and battle axe both have 19-20 threat range. Since critical hits don't do more damage just wounds instead of vitality damage. With the vitality/wound system I just make it you make a hit and meet the threat range and hit by 10+ and you do maximum damage to wounds and no further rolls.

Only if you've changed it.
Battleaxes threaten on a 20, that's why they have a x3 multiplier. Longsword threatens on a 19-20, that's why they only have a x2 multiplier.

Did you read what I wrote? I'm now using the vitality/wound system from UA. You don't seem to know that in this system weapons don't use the crit multipler. Weapons that have a crit multiplier more than x2 increase the threat range instead. x3 increases threat range by 1, x4 increases threat range by 2, etc. So a longsword and a battle axe both have a threat range of 19-20 and do normal damage from a crit to wounds.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
starfire311 01-17-05, 12:25 PM	This houserule may fall into the catagory of fixing something that ain't broke. A few days ago me and a few of my friends were talking about the crit mutliplier and how it was odd that a Battle axe can do a x3 crit but has no chance of dealing double damage... Then I brought up the statisticall anomylly that you are more likely to do 8 or 10 points of damage with a scythe than you are to deal 9. This really seems odd to us. So I came with up the idea of if you threaten a crit with a weapon that you need to roll a confirmation for each additional multiplier. so say you get a 20 with a battle axe you would actually roll 2 confirmation rolls and if you only confirmed one then you would deal double damage, if you confirmed both then it would be triple damage. Same thing with a scythe but you would roll 3 confirmation rolls. What do you guys think about this. If I crunched the numbers right, this method is statistically equal to the normal method, but provides a little more variablity.
Xeviat-DM 01-17-05, 12:41 PM	It sounds like it would make high range low multiplier weapons more valuable than low range high multiplier weapons. When you roll critical damage, do you multiply what is rolled or do you roll extra dice?
starfire311 01-17-05, 02:32 PM	It sounds like it would make high range low multiplier weapons more valuable than low range high multiplier weapons. I not sure about that. Take battle axe for instance, it is 20/x3. Under current system if you roll a 20 you threaten a crit and you make another attack to confirm it, if you succeed on the confirmation you do triple damage. if you fail you get single damage under my system if you roll a 20 you threaten and get to make 2 more attacks for each one that succeeds you do addtional damage. so if both succeed you do triple damage, if one succeeds you do double damage and if both fail you do single damage. In my system you are less likely to do triple damage and more like to do extra damage assuming a 50% chance of confirming a crit. You would have a 25% chance to do triple damage and a 50% chance to do double damage and a 25% chance to do single damage. under the current system it is 50% chance to do triple damage and 50% chance to do single damage. When you roll critical damage, do you multiply what is rolled or do you roll extra dice? we roll extra dice So a crit with a scythe is 8D4.... thus you are more likely to get a 10 on a crit than a 9. and on any given attack you are much more likely to get 8 damage than to roll a crit and get a 9. That is why a scythe is more likly to do 8 and 10 damage than 9.
Xeviat-DM 01-17-05, 03:02 PM	Okay, I see what you mean. So with your idea, the 20/x3, there's a chance the character could do something rather than the critical just failing. I see. Not sure if I like that though. An axe is unreliable, but when you hit someone with it good, it does a lot of damage. I can't imagine a critical hit with an axe, pick, or scythe doing anything less than a crud load of damage. But now that you've explained it more, it sounds balanced. Just not my thing.
Gold Katana 01-17-05, 04:25 PM	Kind of the obverse of your approach: We have houseruled that if the confirmation is a natural 20 (despite the weapon's normal crit range), it adds on one extra multiplier if the next roll also confirms. If the third roll is also a nat 20 (hasn't happend yet), continue in this fashion ad nauseum. In this case, a battle axe that threatens, then confirms with a natural 20, then confirms again deals X4 damage. It has occurred a few times - enough to be interesting but not broken.
HailSpork 01-18-05, 01:06 AM	I really really like that. Kind of interested in how the numbers work out... As it is, assuming that a 19 hits, a 19-20 weapon is likely to deal an extra 10%(chance to confirm) damage from a crit; a 20/x3 weapon is likely to deal the same. With your rule, the 19-20 will be unnafected. However, the 20/x3 becomes... (doing some stats work on the side) where A is the chance to confirm .1(2(1-A)A+2A*A)==.1(2A-2AA+2AA)==.2A; exactly the same expected gain. Of course, this would not be combinable with any house rules to have a crit confirm roll a crit; that would be ungodly overpowered for a high multiplier item. Also, Katana: about layering crits, I played in a game where if you rolled a crit threat on the crit confirm, you would roll to confirm again. We also used the addition of crit multipliers so that a "double crit" on a x3 weapon would be x5 (since you're adding x2). This keeps them on par with higher crit range weapons. I did manage to roll 3 20s in a row with a scythe. 20d4+60 dmg... sounds crazy, but that's 1/8000 (not including the confirm at the end).
Xandore 01-20-05, 06:45 PM	I prefer to make as few rolls as possible so the method I use for crits: When you make a crit threat and hit by 5 or more over what you need to hit you do maximum damage for one roll. A sucessful confirmation roll you then get the additional roll(s). So a x2 weapon when hitting by 5+ and confirmed crit roll would result in maximum damage for the 1st roll plus the result of a second roll. Regardless of success on the confirmation if you hit by 5+ and meet the crit threat then you do maximum damage from the one roll, thus eliminating the need for that roll. If you make the threat range and hit by 10+ then you do maximum damage. If you then make a successful confirmation you also do maximum for the second roll. If it was a x3 weapon you would only need to roll one for the 3rd roll. You continue in this fashion for +15, +20, etc. Though I don't have any weapons in my campaign that is more than x4 multipler. So in any case you only do maximum damage for one roll unless you confirm the roll. Any hit that is by 0 to +4 over what you need you will just have to roll :weep:
starfire311 01-21-05, 04:16 PM	Regardless of success on the confirmation if you hit by 5+ and meet the crit threat then you do maximum damage from the one roll, thus eliminating the need for that roll. you do realize this amkes weapons with larger threat ranges better than ones with smaller threat ranges... in this system a long sword > Battle Axe and I really wouldn't like that, but hey if you guys like it go for it. Aside I am already protesting the unfair treatment of the great axe by having my Living greyhawk dwarf wield a great sword. Everyone I meet says that is so undwarfy lol.
Xandore 01-23-05, 12:50 PM	you do realize this amkes weapons with larger threat ranges better than ones with smaller threat ranges... in this system a long sword > Battle Axe and I really wouldn't like that, but hey if you guys like it go for it. Aside I am already protesting the unfair treatment of the great axe by having my Living greyhawk dwarf wield a great sword. Everyone I meet says that is so undwarfy lol. Don't really see the difference with my method and the normal one. Doesn't matter to me anyways since UA came out I use Vitality/wounds and long sword and battle axe both have 19-20 threat range. Since critical hits don't do more damage just wounds instead of vitality damage. With the vitality/wound system I just make it you make a hit and meet the threat range and hit by 10+ and you do maximum damage to wounds and no further rolls.
Pyrik 02-09-05, 01:32 PM	...long sword and battle axe both have 19-20 threat range. Only if you've changed it. Battleaxes threaten on a 20, that's why they have a x3 multiplier. Longsword threatens on a 19-20, that's why they only have a x2 multiplier. Unwieldy weapons are devastating when used effectively, but are harder to use effectively, I think is the general idea. In one game, all the archers wanted to change their bows to 19-20 weapons, but keep the x3. It didn't wash. DM would only increase the threat range by reducing the damage potential.
Xandore 02-09-05, 04:43 PM	Don't really see the difference with my method and the normal one. Doesn't matter to me anyways since UA came out I use Vitality/wounds and long sword and battle axe both have 19-20 threat range. Since critical hits don't do more damage just wounds instead of vitality damage. With the vitality/wound system I just make it you make a hit and meet the threat range and hit by 10+ and you do maximum damage to wounds and no further rolls. Only if you've changed it. Battleaxes threaten on a 20, that's why they have a x3 multiplier. Longsword threatens on a 19-20, that's why they only have a x2 multiplier. Did you read what I wrote? I'm now using the vitality/wound system from UA. You don't seem to know that in this system weapons don't use the crit multipler. Weapons that have a crit multiplier more than x2 increase the threat range instead. x3 increases threat range by 1, x4 increases threat range by 2, etc. So a longsword and a battle axe both have a threat range of 19-20 and do normal damage from a crit to wounds.