Post/Author/DateTime	Post
obsidian_tower 07-09-06, 02:53 AM	This one is for the math people. Questions about whether called shots are a good idea aside, I've decided to implement a system for them based off the crit system. The basic idea is that a player can take a penalty on the attack roll in order to gain an increased crit range and multiplier. I've done the math on the crits, and increasing the range and multiplier by the same number seems to keep the average damage balanced across the different weapons. What I am less sure of is how much the attack penalty should be for each increment. By calculating the average increase in damage across each increment you can see that it increases more each level (+4, +6, +8). Take X to be the average damage for whatever weapon you're using. +0: 19-20 (x2), 20 (x3) Average damage: 18X/20 + 2*2X/20 = 22X/20 +1: 19-20 (x2) -> 18-20 (x3) Average damage: 26X/20 +1: 20 (x3) -> 19-20 (x4) +2: 19-20 (x2) -> 17-20 (x4) Average damage: 32X/20 +3: 19-20 (x2) -> 16-20 (x5) Average damage: 40X/20 [Hope that math is clear enough.] So how much of a penalty should each increment impose? Since damage doesn't increase evenly, it seems the penalty shouldn't either. I was thinking something like -3, -6, -10. How balanced does this sound to you? Is it worth the penalty? I'd like it to be applicable to all levels, but I'm most concerned with the lvl 4-5 range, as that's where my party is now. Also I considered adding a Called Shot feat that would decrease the penalties for called shots (normally, any character would be able to attempt them.) That comes second though. Thanks for the help, hope this gives the statistically-inclined a good exercise. Edited for clarity
Wayside 07-09-06, 03:50 AM	This sounds like a major pitfall in my mind that could be too easily exploited. Example: At low level this is an enormous loophole because a character can simply cast true strike, forfeit a giant amount of attack bonus, and have a very good chance of scoring a critical hit, which at a low level is a devastating occurance. My suggestion if you really want to have this mechanic is to allow them to sacrifice base attack bonus, not attack bonus. Using your current thought on penalties of -3, -6, -10 sound viable if you handle it in this manner. This way only characters with sufficient base attack bonus can do the maneuvers, keeping rediculous attacks like by using true strike unavailable since the penalty can be no greater than the base attack of the attacker. I would also consider taking away extra attacks a character would gain through base attack as he is focusing all of his power into one devastating and precise blow.
obsidian_tower 07-09-06, 12:25 PM	Ah, true strike...thanks for pointing that out. One of my PC's is going for arcane archer, I can just see her having a field day with that. Limiting the penalty to your BAB would make this more similar Power Attack, and sounds like a good plan. Low-level fighters wouldn't even be able to attempt anything but the first increment, though, which sounds a bit nerfed to me, but actually might not be a bad thing. In light of the true strike shortcoming perhaps the penalties should be upped to -3, -7, and -12. It also makes sense that this should be a full-round action. This would balance out the fact that at high levels a -10 (-12) penalty might not make much difference. However if you have a huge penalty AND it's the only attack you get, players wouldn't try it every attack. The increased chance to crit for massive damage would be offset by the loss of the other attacks. Good suggestions, thank you! I'll run this by my players at the next session.
Wayside 07-09-06, 02:14 PM	-double post-
Wayside 07-09-06, 02:16 PM	yeah, i agree with you that low-level characters not having it as an option does feel like it's been nerfed a bit, but at the same point it's also a necessary step in balancing because of the many ways to boost your attack bonus. The full-round action part might be a bit unnecessary depending on the situation, a higher level fencer with a rapier, improved crit, and the use of this ability could pick someone apart with multiple attacks. Thinking about it, a better idea might be to make it a standard action, giving something their players can do on the round the moveup to attack. Now rather than move up and attack once, they can move up watching their foe for an opening and then take a focused and powerful strike. If you keep the penalty, a standard action would be the way to go in my opinion. Another option you could consider is to remove the penalty for performing this action and make it a full-round action for a single concentrated and powerful swing. Change the penalties to base attack requirements, remove the penalty to hit, and make it a full round action for 1 attack to represent that they waited for the right moment to strike to gain these bonuses to their critical chance and damage. If you do keep it as a full-round action i suggest the second method, it depends on the effect you are going for, for putting as much devastating power as the character can behind the swing or shot i would use the first method with a standard action at a penalty, and if you want it to represent the character specifically picking out a weak spot and waiting for the right moment to strike it, i would go with the second option.
Tytalus 07-11-06, 04:41 AM	Overall, I quite like it. Yet ... +0: 19-20 (x2), 20 (x3) Average damage: 18X/20 + 2*2X/20 = 22X/20 +1: 19-20 (x2) -> 18-20 (x3) Average damage: 26X/20 +1: 20 (x3) -> 19-20 (x4) +2: 19-20 (x2) -> 17-20 (x4) Average damage: 32X/20 +3: 19-20 (x2) -> 16-20 (x5) Average damage: 40X/20 Note that in your calculation a Threat equals a Critical hit, which is not always the case (especially if you are taking penalties to your to-hit for a called shot). Note that this actually works out quite nicely: it's tough to find a weak spot (i.e., make a called shot) on high-AC opponents. How are you going to handle Improved Critical / Keen? Is the bonus to the threat range going to double as well? I would argue that taking a called shot is a full-round action (i.e., no iterative attacks - making a called shot requires finding the 'right moment/opening' IMHO), an that the max penalty should be limited by BAB, as has been suggested already.